Spencer Stuart Board Index
2ipnQXb
2ipnQXb
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
2016<br />
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong><br />
<strong>Board</strong> <strong>Index</strong><br />
A Perspective on U.S. <strong>Board</strong>s<br />
board index 2016 1
spencer stuart perspective for 2016<br />
About <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> board services<br />
At <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong>, we know how much leadership matters. We are trusted by organizations around<br />
the world to help them make the senior-level leadership decisions that have a lasting impact on their<br />
enterprises. Through our executive search, board and leadership advisory services, we help build and<br />
enhance high-performing teams for select clients ranging from major multinationals to emerging<br />
companies to nonprofit institutions.<br />
Privately held since 1956, we focus on delivering knowledge, insight and results through the collaborative<br />
efforts of a team of experts — now spanning 56 offices, 30 countries and more than 50 practice specialties.<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s and leaders consistently turn to <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> to help address their evolving leadership<br />
needs in areas such as senior-level executive search, board recruitment, board effectiveness, succession<br />
planning, in-depth senior management assessment and many other facets of organizational effectiveness.<br />
For more than 30 years, our <strong>Board</strong> Practice has helped boards around the world identify and recruit independent<br />
directors and provided advice to chairmen, CEOs and nominating committees on important governance<br />
issues. We serve a range of organizations across geographies and scale, from leading multinationals<br />
to smaller organizations. In the past year alone, we conducted more than 600 director searches worldwide,<br />
and in North America one-third of those assignments were for companies with revenues under $1 billion.<br />
Our global team of board experts works together to ensure that our clients have unrivaled access to<br />
the best existing and potential director talent, and regularly assists boards in increasing the diversity<br />
of their composition. We have helped place women in more than 1,600 board director roles and<br />
recruited roughly 600 minority directors around the world.<br />
In addition to our work with clients, <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> has long played an active role in corporate<br />
governance by exploring — both on our own and with other prestigious institutions — key concerns<br />
of boards and innovative solutions to the challenges facing them. Publishing the <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong><br />
<strong>Board</strong> <strong>Index</strong> (SSBI), now in its 31st edition, is just one of our many ongoing efforts.<br />
Each year, we sponsor and participate in several acclaimed director education programs including:<br />
»»<br />
The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) Annual <strong>Board</strong>room Summit & Peer Exchange hosted by<br />
NYSE Governance Services<br />
»»<br />
The Global <strong>Board</strong> Leaders’ Summit hosted by the National Association of Corporate Directors<br />
»»<br />
The Global Institutes sponsored by the WomenCorporateDirectors (WCD) Foundation<br />
»<br />
»»<br />
The New Directors Program, a unique two-year development program designed to provide<br />
» The Corporate Governance Conference at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management<br />
first-time, non-executive directors with an exclusive forum for peer dialogue on key issues and<br />
“unwritten rules” of corporate boards, produced in partnership with the Boston Consulting Group,<br />
Frederick W. Cook & Co., Gibson Dunn, Lazard and PricewaterhouseCoopers<br />
Social Media @ <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong><br />
Stay up to date on the trends and topics that are relevant to your business and career.<br />
@<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong><br />
© 2016 <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong>. All rights reserved.<br />
For information about copying, distributing and displaying this work, contact: permissions@spencerstuart.com.<br />
2<br />
spencer stuart
Contents<br />
1 <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> Perspective for 2016<br />
8 S&P 500 <strong>Board</strong>s: Trends over One, Five and 10 Years<br />
10 <strong>Board</strong> Composition<br />
10 New Independent Directors<br />
12 Recruiting New Directors<br />
13 Director Onboarding<br />
14 <strong>Board</strong> Size<br />
14 <strong>Board</strong> Independence<br />
14 Term Length and Resignation Policies<br />
15 Restrictions on Other Corporate Directorships<br />
16 Term Limits<br />
17 Average Age<br />
18 Mandatory Retirement<br />
18 Director Tenure<br />
19 Female Directors<br />
20 Minority Directors<br />
22 CEO Succession Planning<br />
22 CEO Outside <strong>Board</strong> Service<br />
23 Separation of Chairman and CEO Roles<br />
24 Independent Chairman Background<br />
25 Lead and Presiding Directors<br />
27 <strong>Board</strong> Organization and Process<br />
27 <strong>Board</strong> Meetings<br />
28 Committee Structure and Independence<br />
29 Cybersecurity<br />
29 Committee Meeting Frequency<br />
30 Committee Chairman Background<br />
31 <strong>Board</strong> Evaluations<br />
32 Shareholder Engagement<br />
34 Director Compensation<br />
34 Overall Compensation Mix<br />
35 <strong>Board</strong> Retainers<br />
36 <strong>Board</strong> Meeting Fees<br />
37 Equity Compensation<br />
37 <strong>Board</strong> Leadership Compensation<br />
38 Committee Compensation<br />
39 Averages by Industry, Region, Sales<br />
41 Comparative <strong>Board</strong> Data
4<br />
spencer stuart
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> Perspective for 2016<br />
Investor attention to board performance and governance continues to<br />
escalate, and, increasingly, it’s large institutional investors — so-called<br />
“passive” investors — who are making known their expectations in areas<br />
such as board composition, disclosure and shareholder engagement.<br />
Long-term investors have shifted their posture to taking positions on<br />
good governance, and are increasingly demonstrating common ground<br />
with activists on governance topics.<br />
<strong>Board</strong> composition is a particular area of focus, as traditional<br />
institutional investors have become more explicit in demanding that<br />
boards demonstrate that they are being thoughtful about who is sitting<br />
around the board table and that directors are contributing. They are<br />
looking more closely at disclosures related to board refreshment, board<br />
performance and assessment practices, in some cases establishing<br />
voting policies on governance.<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s are taking notice. Directors want to ensure that their boards<br />
contribute at the highest level, aligning with shareholder interests and<br />
expectations. In response, boards are enhancing their disclosures on<br />
board composition and leadership, reviewing governance practices and<br />
establishing protocols for engaging with investors. Here are some of the<br />
trends we are seeing in the key areas of investor concern.<br />
<strong>Board</strong> composition<br />
The composition of the board — who the directors are, the skills and<br />
expertise they bring, and how they interact — is critical for long-term<br />
value creation, and an area of governance where investors increasingly<br />
expect greater transparency. Shareholders are looking for a wellexplained<br />
rationale for why the group of people sitting around the<br />
board table are the right ones based on the strategic priorities of the<br />
business. They want to know that the board has the processes in place<br />
to review and evolve board composition in light of emerging needs,<br />
and that the board regularly evaluates the contributions and tenure<br />
of current board members and the relevance of their experience.<br />
board index 2016 1
spencer stuart perspective for 2016<br />
345<br />
New independent directors<br />
Acknowledging investor interest in their composition, more boards are<br />
reviewing how to best communicate their thinking about the types of<br />
expertise needed in the board — and how individual directors provide<br />
that expertise. More than one-third of the 96 corporate secretaries<br />
responding to our annual governance survey, conducted each year as<br />
part of the research for the <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> <strong>Board</strong> <strong>Index</strong>, said their board<br />
has changed the way it reports director bios/qualifications; among<br />
those that have not yet made changes, 15% expect the board to change<br />
how they present director qualifications in the future.<br />
What’s happening to board composition in practice after all of the<br />
talk about increasing board turnover? In 2016, we actually saw a small<br />
decline in the number of new independent directors elected to<br />
S&P 500 boards. S&P 500 boards included in our index elected 345<br />
new independent directors during the 2016 proxy year — averaging<br />
0.72 new directors per board. Last year, S&P 500 boards added a total<br />
of 376 new directors (0.78 new directors per board).<br />
Nearly one-third (32%) of the new independent directors on<br />
S&P 500 boards are serving on their first outside corporate board.<br />
Women account for 32% of new directors, the highest rate of female<br />
representation since we began tracking this data for the S&P 500.<br />
This year’s class of new directors, however, includes fewer minority<br />
directors (defined as African-American, Hispanic/Latino and Asian);<br />
15% of the 345 new independent directors are minorities, a decrease<br />
from 18% in 2015.<br />
27%<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s with an<br />
independent chair<br />
With the rise of shareholder activism, we’ve also seen an increase in<br />
investors and investment managers on boards. This year, 12% of new<br />
independent directors are investors, compared with 4% in 2011 and<br />
6% in 2006.<br />
Independent board leadership<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s continue to feel pressure from some shareholders to<br />
separate the chair and CEO roles and name an independent chairman.<br />
And, indeed, 27% of S&P 500 boards, versus 21% in 2011, have an<br />
independent chair. An independent chair is defined as an independent<br />
director or a former executive who has met applicable NYSE or<br />
NASDAQ rules for independence over time. This actually represents<br />
a small decline from 29% last year. Meanwhile, naming a lead director<br />
remains the most common form of independent board leadership:<br />
87% of S&P 500 boards report having a lead or presiding director,<br />
nearly all of whom (98%) are identified by name in the proxy.<br />
2<br />
spencer stuart
In our governance survey, 12% of respondents said their board has<br />
recently separated the roles of chairman and CEO, while 33% said their<br />
board has discussed whether to split the roles within the next five<br />
years. Among boards that expect to or have recently separated the<br />
chair and CEO roles, 72% cite a CEO transition as the reason, while<br />
20% believe the chair/CEO split represents the best governance.<br />
In response to investor interest in board leadership structure — and<br />
sometimes demands for an independent chairman — more boards<br />
are discussing their leadership structure in their proxies, for example,<br />
explaining the rationale for maintaining a combined chair/CEO role<br />
and delineating the responsibilities of the lead director. Among the<br />
lead director responsibilities boards highlight: approving the agenda<br />
for board meetings, calling meetings and executive sessions of<br />
independent directors, presiding over executive sessions, providing<br />
board feedback to the CEO following executive sessions, leading the<br />
performance evaluation of the CEO and the board assessment, and<br />
meeting with major shareholders or other external parties, when<br />
necessary. Some proxies include a letter to shareholders from the lead<br />
independent director.<br />
4%<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s setting an<br />
explicit term limit for<br />
non-executive directors<br />
Tenure and term limits<br />
Director tenure continues to be a hot topic for some shareholders.<br />
While some rating agencies and investors have questioned the<br />
independence of directors with “excessive” tenure, there are no<br />
specific regulations or listing standards in the U.S. that speak to<br />
director independence based on tenure. And, in fact, most companies<br />
do not have governance rules limiting tenure; only 19 S&P 500 boards<br />
(4%) set an explicit term limit for non-executive directors, a modest<br />
increase from 2015 when 13 boards (3%) had director term limits.<br />
Just 3% of survey respondents said their boards are considering<br />
establishing director term limits, but many boards are disclosing<br />
more in their proxies about director tenure. Specifically, boards are<br />
describing their efforts to ensure a balance between short-tenured and<br />
long-tenured directors. And several companies have included a short<br />
summary of the board’s average tenure accompanied by a pie chart<br />
breaking down the tenure of directors on the board (e.g., directors with<br />
less than five years tenure, between five and 10 years, and more than<br />
10 years tenure on the board).<br />
8.3years<br />
Average board tenure<br />
board index 2016 3
spencer stuart perspective for 2016<br />
Among S&P 500 boards overall, the average board tenure is 8.3 years,<br />
a slight decrease from 8.7 five years ago. The median tenure has<br />
declined as well in that time, from 8.4 to 8.0. The majority of boards,<br />
63%, have an average tenure between six and 10 years, but 19% of<br />
boards have an average tenure of 11 or more years.<br />
19%<br />
We also looked this year at the tenure of individual directors: 35% of<br />
independent directors have served on their boards for five years or<br />
less, 28% have served for six to 10 years, and 22% for 11 to 15 years.<br />
Fifteen percent of independent directors have served on their boards<br />
for 16 years or more.<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s with an average<br />
tenure of 11 or more years<br />
Mandatory retirement<br />
In the absence of term or tenure limits, most S&P 500 boards<br />
rely on mandatory retirement ages to promote turnover. About<br />
three-quarters (73%) of S&P 500 boards report having a mandatory<br />
retirement age for directors. Eleven percent report that they do not<br />
have a mandatory retirement age, and 16% do not discuss mandatory<br />
retirement in their proxies.<br />
Retirement ages have crept up in recent years, as boards have raised<br />
them to allow experienced directors to serve longer. Thirty-nine percent<br />
of boards have mandatory retirement ages of 75 or older, compared<br />
with 20% in 2011 and just 9% in 2006. Four boards have a retirement<br />
age of 80. The most common mandatory retirement age is 72, set by<br />
45% of S&P 500 boards.<br />
39%<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s with a<br />
mandatory retirement<br />
age of 75 or higher<br />
As retirement ages have increased, so has the average age of<br />
independent directors. The average age of S&P 500 independent<br />
directors is 63 today, two years older than a decade ago. In that same<br />
period, the median age rose from 61 to 64. Meanwhile, the number of<br />
older boards has increased; 37% of S&P 500 boards have an average<br />
age of 64 or older, compared with 19% a decade ago, and 15 of today’s<br />
boards (3%) have an average age of 70 or greater, versus four (1%) a<br />
decade ago.<br />
<strong>Board</strong> evaluations<br />
Another topic on which large institutional investors have become more<br />
vocal is board performance evaluations. Shareholders are seeking<br />
greater transparency about how boards address their own performance<br />
and the suitability of individual directors — and whether they are using<br />
assessments as a catalyst for refreshing the board as new needs arise.<br />
4<br />
spencer stuart
We have seen a growing trend in support of individual director<br />
assessments as part of the board effectiveness assessment — not<br />
to grade directors, but to provide constructive feedback that can<br />
improve performance. Yet the pace of adoption of individual director<br />
assessments has been measured. Today, roughly one-third (32%) of<br />
S&P 500 boards evaluate the full board, committees and individual<br />
directors annually, an increase from 29% in 2011.<br />
In our survey of corporate secretaries, respondents said evaluations<br />
are most often conducted by a director, typically the chairman, lead<br />
director or a committee chair. A wide range of internal and external<br />
parties are also tapped to conduct board assessments, including inhouse<br />
and external legal counsel, the corporate secretary and board<br />
consulting firms. Thirty-five percent use director self-assessments, and<br />
15% include peer reviews. According to proxies, a small number of<br />
boards, but more than in the past, disclose that they used an outside<br />
consultant to facilitate all or a portion of the evaluation process.<br />
63<br />
Average age of<br />
independent directors<br />
Shareholder engagement<br />
In light of investors’ growing desire for direct engagement with<br />
directors, more boards have established frameworks for shareholders<br />
to raise questions and engage in meaningful, two-way discussions<br />
with the board. In addition to improving disclosures about board<br />
composition, assessment and other key governance areas, some<br />
boards include in their proxies a summary of their shareholder<br />
outreach efforts. For example, they detail the number of investors<br />
the board met with, the issues discussed and how the company and<br />
board responded. A few boards facilitate direct access to the board<br />
by providing contact information for individual directors, including<br />
the lead director and audit committee chair.<br />
Going further, many boards now proactively reach out to their<br />
company’s largest shareholders. In our survey, 83% of respondents<br />
said management or the board contacted the company’s large<br />
institutional investors or largest shareholders, an increase from<br />
70% the year prior. The most common topic about which companies<br />
engaged with shareholders was proxy access (52%), an increase<br />
from 33% in 2015. Other topics included “say on pay” (51%), CEO<br />
compensation (40%), director tenure (30%), board refreshment (27%),<br />
shareholder engagement approach (27%) and chairman independence<br />
(24%). Survey respondents also wrote in more than a dozen additional<br />
topics, including majority/cumulative voting, disclosure enhancements,<br />
environmental issues and gender pay equity.<br />
32%<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s that evaluate the<br />
full board, committees and<br />
individual directors annually<br />
board index 2016 5
spencer stuart perspective for 2016<br />
Enhancing board performance<br />
The topic of board refreshment can be a highly charged one for boards. But having the right skills<br />
around the table is critical for the board’s ability to provide the appropriate guidance and oversight of<br />
management. Furthermore, the capabilities and perspectives that a board needs evolve over time as the<br />
business context changes. <strong>Board</strong>s can ensure that they have the right perspectives around the table and<br />
are well-equipped to address the issues that drive shareholder value — which, after all, is what investors<br />
are looking for — by doing the following:<br />
»»<br />
Viewing director recruitment in terms of ongoing board<br />
succession planning, not one-off replacements.<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s should periodically review the skills and expertise<br />
on the board to identify gaps in skills or expertise based<br />
on changes in strategy or the business context.<br />
»»<br />
Proactively communicating the skill sets and expertise in<br />
the boardroom — and the roadmap for future succession.<br />
Publishing the board’s skill matrix and sharing the<br />
board’s thinking about the types of expertise that are<br />
needed on the board — and how individual directors<br />
provide that expertise — signals to investors that the<br />
board is thoughtful about board succession.<br />
»»<br />
Setting expectations for appropriate tenure both at the<br />
aggregate and individual levels.<br />
By setting term expectations when new directors join,<br />
boards can combat the perceived stigma attached to<br />
leaving a board before the mandatory retirement age.<br />
Ideally, boards will create an environment where directors<br />
are willing to acknowledge when the board would benefit<br />
from bringing on different expertise.<br />
»»<br />
Thinking like an activist and identifying vulnerabilities<br />
in board renewal and performance.<br />
Proactive boards conduct board evaluations annually<br />
to identify weaknesses in expertise or performance.<br />
They periodically engage third parties to manage the<br />
process and are disciplined about identifying and<br />
holding themselves accountable for action items<br />
stemming from the assessment.<br />
»»<br />
Establishing a framework for engaging with investors.<br />
This starts with proactive and useful disclosure, which<br />
demonstrates that the board has thought about its<br />
composition, performance and other specific issues.<br />
In addition, it is valuable to have a protocol in<br />
place enumerating responsibilities related to<br />
shareholder engagement.<br />
Furthermore, the<br />
capabilities and<br />
perspectives that<br />
a board needs<br />
evolve over time<br />
as the business<br />
context changes.<br />
6<br />
spencer stuart
OTHER HIGHLIGHTS FROM THIS YEAR’S INDEX<br />
»<br />
» Only 19% of new independent directors are active CEOs, chairs, presidents and chief<br />
operating officers, compared with 24% in 2011, 29% in 2006 and 49% in 1998, the first<br />
year we looked at this data for S&P 500 companies.<br />
»»<br />
Active executives with financial backgrounds (CFOs, other financial executives, as well<br />
as investors and bankers) represent 15% of new independent directors this year, an<br />
increase from 12% last year. Another 10% of new directors are retired finance and public<br />
accounting executives.<br />
»»<br />
On average, S&P 500 directors have 2.1 outside corporate board affiliations, although most<br />
directors aren’t restricted from serving on more.<br />
»»<br />
The number of boards with no female directors dropped to the lowest level we have seen; six<br />
S&P 500 boards (1%) have no women, a noteworthy decline from 2006, when 52 boards<br />
(11%) included no female members. Women now constitute 21% of all S&P 500 directors.<br />
»»<br />
Among the boards of the 200 largest S&P companies, the total number of minority directors<br />
has held steady at 15% since 2011. 88% of the top 200 companies have at least one minority<br />
director, the same as 10 years ago.<br />
»»<br />
Only 43% of S&P 500 CEOs serve on one or more outside corporate boards in addition<br />
to their own board, the same as in 2015. In 2006, 55% of CEOs served on at least one<br />
outside board.<br />
»»<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s met an average of 8.4 times for regularly scheduled and special meetings, up from<br />
8.1 last year and 8.2 five years ago. The median number of meetings rose from 7.0 last year<br />
to 8.0.<br />
»»<br />
The average annual total compensation for S&P 500 directors, excluding the chairman's<br />
compensation, is $280,389.<br />
»»<br />
Over time, the compensation mix for directors has evolved, with more stock grants and fewer<br />
stock options. Today, stock grants represent 54% of total director compensation, versus 48%<br />
five years ago, while stock options represent 6% of compensation today, down from 10% five<br />
years ago. Cash accounts for 38% of director compensation, versus 39% in 2011.<br />
»»<br />
95% of the independent chairmen of S&P 500 boards receive an additional fee, averaging<br />
$165,112. Nearly two-thirds of lead and presiding directors, 65%, receive additional<br />
compensation. The average premium paid to lead and presiding directors is $33,354.<br />
Editor’s Note<br />
The <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> <strong>Board</strong> <strong>Index</strong> (SSBI) is based on our analysis of the most recent proxy reports from the S&P 500, plus an extensive supplemental<br />
survey. This edition of the SSBI draws on the latest proxy statements from 482 companies filed between May 15, 2015, and May 15, 2016, and<br />
responses from 96 companies to our governance survey conducted in the second quarter of 2016. Survey respondents are typically corporate<br />
secretaries, general counsel or chief governance officers. Proxy and survey data have been supplemented with information compiled in <strong>Spencer</strong><br />
<strong>Stuart</strong>’s proprietary database.<br />
board index 2016 7
S&P 500 <strong>Board</strong>s: Trends over One, Five and 10 Years<br />
<strong>Board</strong> composition<br />
2016 (a) 2015 (b) 2011 (c) 2006 (d) % change<br />
5-year<br />
Average board size 10.8 10.8 10.7 10.7 1% 1%<br />
Independent directors 85% 84% 84% 81% 1% 5%<br />
Average age of<br />
independent directors<br />
New independent directors<br />
63.0 63.1 62.4 61.0 1% 3%<br />
Total number 345 376 294 391 17% -12%<br />
Women 32% 31% 21% 23% 52% 39%<br />
Active CEO/chair/president/<br />
COO/vice chair<br />
Retired CEO/chair/president/<br />
COO/vice chair<br />
19% 20% 24% 29% -21% -34%<br />
19% 18% 19% 11% 0% 73%<br />
Financial backgrounds 25% 24% 18% 24% 39% 4%<br />
Other corporate executives 23% 25% 21% 15% 10% 53%<br />
10-year<br />
% change Comments<br />
<strong>Board</strong> size remains constant over the<br />
past decade<br />
The representation of independent directors<br />
has increased by 5% in the last decade<br />
Independent directors are two years older<br />
on average than 10 years ago<br />
17% more new independent directors than<br />
five years ago<br />
Nearly one-third of new directors<br />
are women<br />
Sitting CEOs and other top executives<br />
are steadily decreasing as a source of<br />
new directors<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s continue to tap retired<br />
senior executives<br />
Demand for directors with financial<br />
expertise grows<br />
Other C-level executives have become an<br />
important source of new directors<br />
Women directors<br />
Women as a % of all directors 21% 20% 16% 15% 33% 42% Female representation continues to grow<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s with at least one<br />
woman director<br />
99% 97% 91% 89% 8% 10% Still 6 boards have no female directors<br />
CEO profile<br />
% of CEOs serving on an<br />
outside board<br />
43% 43% 46% 55% -7% -22%<br />
Women CEOs 24 22 15 12 60% 100%<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s where CEO is the<br />
only non-independent<br />
60% 61% 57% 39% 5% 54%<br />
Average age 57.2 57.0 56.5 55.2 1% 4%<br />
Average tenure with company 19.4 18.8 16.4 14.4 18% 35%<br />
<strong>Board</strong> leadership<br />
CEO is also chairman 52% 52% 59% 67% -12% -22%<br />
Independent chairman 27% 29% 21% 10% 29% 170%<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s with lead or<br />
presiding director<br />
<strong>Board</strong> meetings<br />
Average number of<br />
board meetings<br />
Median number of<br />
board meetings<br />
87% 89% 92% 96% -7% -10%<br />
8.4 8.1 8.2 8.4 2% 0%<br />
8 7 8 8 0% 0%<br />
CEOs continue to reduce their outside<br />
board commitments<br />
The number of female CEOs has<br />
doubled, but women still lead just 6%<br />
of S&P 500 companies<br />
50% decline in boards with more than one<br />
executive member in the past decade<br />
The average age of CEOs has increased<br />
gradually over the past 10 years<br />
Average CEO company tenure is 3 years<br />
longer than 5 years ago<br />
Nearly half of boards separate the chair<br />
and CEO roles<br />
The percentage of boards with an<br />
independent chair has almost tripled in a<br />
decade, despite small decline from last year<br />
Fewest lead directors in past decade, but<br />
more independent chairs<br />
<strong>Board</strong> meeting frequency returns to<br />
2006 level<br />
Median consistent with 5- and<br />
10-year levels<br />
8<br />
spencer stuart
Retirement age<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s with mandatory<br />
retirement age<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s with mandatory<br />
retirement age of 75+<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s with mandatory<br />
retirement age of 72+<br />
Committee meetings<br />
Average number of audit<br />
committee meetings<br />
Average number of compensation<br />
committee meetings<br />
Audit committee chairmen<br />
Active CEO/chair/president/<br />
vice chair<br />
Financial exec/CFO/treas/<br />
public acct exec<br />
Non-employee director compensation<br />
(a)<br />
Data based on proxy year May 15, 2015, through May 15, 2016.<br />
(b)<br />
Data based on proxy year May 20, 2014, through May 15, 2015.<br />
(c)<br />
Data based on proxy year May 15, 2010, through May 15, 2011.<br />
(d)<br />
Data based on proxy year May 15, 2005, through May 15, 2006.<br />
(e)<br />
Based on non-employee director compensation tables included in 477 and 493 proxies for 2016 and 2011, respectively.<br />
(f)<br />
Not including stock beyond retainer<br />
2016 (a) 2015 (b) 2011 (c) 2006 (d) % change<br />
5-year<br />
73% 73% 73% 78% 0% -6%<br />
10-year<br />
% change Comments<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s with a mandatory retirement age<br />
remain unchanged from 2011<br />
39% 34% 20% 9% 95% 333% Director retirement ages continue to rise<br />
95% 94% 83% 61% 14% 56%<br />
8.6 8.8 8.7 9.5 -1% -9%<br />
6.1 6.1 6.6 6.0 -8% 2%<br />
6% 7% 11% 19% -45% -68%<br />
39% 40% 32% 23% 22% 70%<br />
Total average compensation (e) $285,065 $277,237 $232,142 n/a 23% n/a<br />
Average annual retainer (f) $118,521 $112,144 $88,858 $63,594 33% 86%<br />
Median annual retainer (f) $100,000 $90,000 $75,000 $50,000 33% 100%<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s paying retainer of at<br />
least $100,000<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s paying board<br />
meeting fee<br />
50% 77% 29% 15% 72% 233%<br />
16% 21% 37% 57% -57% -72%<br />
Nearly all S&P 500 boards with a<br />
retirement age set it at 72 or higher<br />
Audit committees do not meet as often<br />
as they did a decade ago<br />
Compensation committee meeting frequency<br />
returning to average from 10 years ago<br />
Fewer active executives serve as<br />
audit committee chair as time<br />
commitment increases<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s more likely to tap financial<br />
executives to chair audit committee<br />
23% increase in total director<br />
compensation in five years<br />
Average retainer grew by more than<br />
85% in 10 years<br />
Median retainer has doubled in the<br />
past decade<br />
72% increase in boards paying a retainer<br />
of $100,000 or more in 5 years<br />
The number of boards paying meeting<br />
fees has fallen below 20%<br />
Average board meeting fee $2,155 $2,041 $2,284 $1,955 -6% 10% Average meeting fee is also on the decline<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s offering stock<br />
option program<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s paying equity in<br />
addition to retainer<br />
Committee compensation<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s paying committee<br />
chair retainer<br />
Average committee<br />
chair retainer<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s paying committee<br />
member retainer<br />
Average committee<br />
member retainer<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s paying committee<br />
meeting fees<br />
Average committee<br />
meeting fees<br />
14% 16% 28% 51% -50% -73%<br />
76% 77% 77% 64% -1% 19%<br />
95% 95% 91% 84% 4% 13%<br />
$15,370 $14,399 $12,476 $9,106 23% 69%<br />
41% 41% 37% 29% 11% 41%<br />
$8,947 $8,926 $7,917 $6,431 13% 39%<br />
21% 26% 35% 59% -40% -64%<br />
$1,677 $1,678 $1,635 $1,499 3% 12%<br />
Most boards have dropped stock options<br />
as a component of director compensation<br />
Three-quarters of boards provide equity in<br />
addition to a cash<br />
Nearly all boards provide a retainer<br />
to committee chairs<br />
Committee chair retainers continue<br />
to rise<br />
Retainers for committee service more<br />
common in lieu of meeting fees<br />
Committee member retainers also<br />
on the rise<br />
About 20% of boards compensate for<br />
committee meeting attendance<br />
The average meeting fee has<br />
increased modestly<br />
board index 2016 9
<strong>Board</strong> Composition<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Composition<br />
2016 Snapshot<br />
345new independent<br />
directors<br />
92<br />
27 %<br />
of boards have an<br />
independent chairman<br />
of boards<br />
% have annual<br />
director elections<br />
23 %<br />
32 %<br />
of new directors<br />
are female<br />
an all-time high<br />
32 %<br />
of new directors are<br />
serving for the first time<br />
of new directors are one or two<br />
levels down from the CEO role<br />
Slight decline in new director recruiting<br />
»<br />
» S&P 500 boards included in our index elected 345 new independent directors during the 2016 proxy year<br />
— averaging 0.72 new directors per board. Last year, S&P 500 boards added a total of 376 new directors<br />
(0.78 new directors per board).<br />
»»<br />
Among the 482 boards in our study, 48% added at least one new director. The 345 new directors joined<br />
233 boards, with 87 boards welcoming more than one director.<br />
»»<br />
The number of new independent directors decreased 8% from last year. This is still the third most since<br />
2008, when S&P 500 boards added 380 new directors.<br />
10<br />
spencer stuart
Fewer actively employed executives joining outside boards than<br />
in the past<br />
»»<br />
More than half (53%) of new independent directors are active senior executives and professionals. Over<br />
the past decade, we have seen a decline in the number of actively employed executives taking on outside<br />
board appointments; active executives made up 59% of new directors in 2011 and 66% a decade ago.<br />
»»<br />
Only 19% of new independent directors are active CEOs, chairs, presidents and chief operating officers,<br />
compared with 24% in 2011, 29% in 2006 and 49% in 1998, the first year we looked at this data for<br />
S&P 500 companies.<br />
»»<br />
With fewer active CEOs taking new outside board roles, we have seen a rise in the representation of<br />
active corporate executives a level or two below the CEO among new independent directors. Corporate<br />
executives such as division and subsidiary presidents and line and functional leaders now make up 23%<br />
of new independent directors, compared with 21% in 2011.<br />
»»<br />
Active executives with financial backgrounds (CFOs and other financial executives, as well as investors<br />
and bankers) represent 15% of new independent directors this year, an increase from 12% last year.<br />
Another 10% of new directors are retired finance and public accounting executives.<br />
»»<br />
Among the 36 new independent directors classified as line and functional leaders, 16% are<br />
technology executives.<br />
One-third of new directors are serving on their first outside<br />
corporate board<br />
»»<br />
Nearly one-third of new independent directors (32%) are serving on their first outside board. This<br />
represents an increase from 26% last year, but a decrease from 2014 when 39% of new directors were<br />
first-time board members, the largest influx of first-time directors we have seen since we began tracking<br />
this data in 2006.<br />
»»<br />
First-time directors are more likely to be actively employed than new directors with previous board<br />
experience: 68% of first-timers are active executives compared with 27% of experienced directors.<br />
»»<br />
Current or retired CEOs are more likely to have outside public company board experience, defined as<br />
membership on a board other than their employer’s board. Only 24% of new directors who are current<br />
or former CEOs are serving on an outside board for the first time.<br />
Nearly one-third of new directors are women<br />
»<br />
» Female representation among new directors rose to 32% in 2016, from 31% in 2015 and 21% in 2011. This is<br />
the highest rate of female representation since 1998 when we began tracking this data for the S&P 500.<br />
»»<br />
New female independent directors are more likely than their male counterparts to be line and functional<br />
leaders; 20% of women are in line or functional roles, compared with 6% of male directors. Another<br />
18% of female directors are division or subsidiary presidents, versus 10% of male directors. By contrast,<br />
male directors are significantly more likely than female directors to be active or retired CEOs and other<br />
top leaders: 47% versus 18%.<br />
»»<br />
28% of new directors have global professional experience — defined in this report as having worked at<br />
an international location — compared with 35% in 2015. New directors have working experience in<br />
diverse global locations, including Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America.<br />
board index 2016 11
<strong>Board</strong> Composition<br />
aDDED PERSPECTIVE<br />
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> Governance Survey: <strong>Board</strong> renewal<br />
69% of survey respondents said their board has a strategy to encourage regular board succession,<br />
unchanged from last year. This represents a significant increase over 41% in 2014, however, reflecting<br />
the increasing attention to composition and board succession planning.<br />
Respondents cited three main drivers of their refreshment strategies: director retirements (91%), the<br />
desire to add new skills (79%) and the goal to increase the diversity of the board (62%).<br />
When asked how many new directors their board intends to recruit in the current year, 37% of respondents<br />
said their board intends to recruit one new director, 13% intend to recruit two new directors, and<br />
2% intend to recruit three or more directors. 36% expect their boards will recruit one or more directors<br />
in 2017. Director retirements are the main driver of board recruitment, cited by 79% of respondents.<br />
Adding new skills (70%) and increasing the diversity of the board (47%) were the two other primary<br />
reasons for adding directors.<br />
In light of the growing interest in board composition by shareholders, this year’s survey asked whether<br />
boards have made changes to the way directors’ qualifications are presented in the proxy. 34% of<br />
respondents said their boards had changed the way they reported director bios/qualifications; among<br />
those that have not made changes, 15% expect the board to make changes to the presentation of<br />
director backgrounds in the future.<br />
Director recruiting profiles<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s are prioritizing women when recruiting new<br />
directors, the survey found: 64% of respondents said<br />
their boards are looking to bring a woman on board, a<br />
10% increase from last year.<br />
Other recruiting priorities are active and retired<br />
CEOs/COOs, at 63% and 58% of respondents,<br />
respectively. More than half of respondents indicated<br />
that minority directors and those with financial expertise<br />
and global perspective were recruiting priorities.<br />
37% of respondents said their boards are prioritizing<br />
specific industry expertise, compared with 27% last year.<br />
Interest in recruiting directors with technology, digital<br />
and marketing expertise is on the rise, the survey found.<br />
In the 2016 survey, 44% said technology expertise was<br />
on their board’s wish list, versus 41% last year. We also<br />
saw an increase in demand for digital and social media<br />
expertise (21% versus 16%) and marketing expertise<br />
(19% versus 14%). Demand for cybersecurity experts<br />
fell slightly to 19% from 20% last year.<br />
Wish list for new director backgrounds *<br />
Women 64%<br />
Active CEO/COO 63%<br />
Retired CEO/COO 58%<br />
Minority 55%<br />
Financial expertise 55%<br />
Global perspective 55%<br />
Technology expertise 44%<br />
Specific industry expertise 37%<br />
Digital/social media expertise 21%<br />
Regulatory/government experience 19%<br />
Marketing expertise 19%<br />
Cybersecurity expertise 19%<br />
Other 7.7%<br />
N = 96 survey respondents<br />
*<br />
Percentages add up to more than 100 as respondents<br />
could select more than one category.<br />
Data in this and other sections labeled “Added Perspective” come from our governance survey, conducted in the second quarter of 2016.<br />
This year, we heard from 96 S&P 500 companies. Respondents include corporate secretaries, general counsel and chief governance officers.<br />
12<br />
spencer stuart
New directors represent diverse industry and<br />
functional backgrounds<br />
»<br />
» Demand for financial backgrounds has been rising modestly in recent years; as noted below, 25% of new<br />
directors are active or retired executives with banking, finance, investment or accounting credentials,<br />
compared with 24% last year, 20% in 2014 and 18% in 2013. Specifically, we are seeing an increase in<br />
directors coming from investing and investment management, together accounting for 12% of new<br />
directors, up from 9% last year.<br />
»»<br />
The top three industry backgrounds for new independent directors are tech/telecommunications,<br />
consumer goods and services, and private equity/investments, representing 15%, 13% and 12% of new<br />
director backgrounds, respectively.<br />
New Independent Director Backgrounds * Year 2016<br />
2006 2011 2016 Men Women<br />
CEO/chair/president/ COO/vice chair 40% 43% 38% 47% 18%<br />
Active 29% 24% 19% 24% 9%<br />
Retired 11% 19% 19% 23% 9%<br />
Other corporate executives 15% 21% 23% 16% 38%<br />
Division/subsidiary presidents 5% 13% 13% 10% 18%<br />
Line and functional leaders 10% 8% 10% 6% 20%<br />
Financial backgrounds 24% 18% 25% 28% 19%<br />
Financial executives/CFO/treasurers 11% 9% 9% 9% 7%<br />
Bankers/investment bankers 4% 3% 2% 3% 2%<br />
Investment managers/investors 6% 4% 12% 14% 7%<br />
Public accounting executives ** 3% 2% 2% 2% 3%<br />
Academics/nonprofit 8% 7% 4% 3% 6%<br />
Consultants 5% 4% 3% 1% 6%<br />
Lawyers 2% 1% 1% 2% 0%<br />
Others *** 6% 6% 6% 3% 13%<br />
N = 236 men and 109 women in 2016<br />
*<br />
Except where noted, all include both active and retired executives.<br />
**<br />
All former partners or executives of public accounting firms.<br />
***<br />
Includes former government employees, medical executives, a real estate broker, a sports/entertainment agent and an author, among others.<br />
ADDED PERSPECTIVE<br />
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> Governance Survey: Director onboarding<br />
»»<br />
90% of respondents said new directors meet with the company’s outside auditor as part of the<br />
director orientation program, and 50% have new directors meet with the company’s<br />
compensation adviser. 8% said new directors meet with outside legal counsel.<br />
» » 68% of respondents said new directors get to know the company through site visits, while 20%<br />
said new directors participate in third-party development/education. 18% require new board<br />
members to attend meetings of all the committees during their first year.<br />
board index 2016 13
<strong>Board</strong> Composition<br />
Average board size hovers near 11<br />
»<br />
» For more than 10 years, the average size of S&P 500 boards has fallen within a consistent range between<br />
10.7 and 10.9 members. S&P 500 boards have 10.8 members on average today, the same as last year.<br />
»»<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s range in size from five to 19 members. Over the past decade, more boards have settled into the<br />
nine to 12 member range; 72% of boards have nine to 12 members today, compared with 66% in 2006.<br />
Larger and smaller boards are less common; 12% of boards have eight or fewer directors, compared<br />
with 15% in 2006; and 16% of boards have 13 or more members, versus 19% in 2006.<br />
»»<br />
BlackRock tops the list of largest boards with 19 members, followed by BB&T with 18 members and<br />
Chubb with 17.<br />
»»<br />
As of their latest proxy filings, the smallest boards — D.R. Horton, Garmin and Microchip Technology<br />
— have five directors, and two boards have six members.<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Size<br />
72% 69% 66%<br />
12% 14% 15% 16%<br />
17% 19%<br />
2016<br />
2011<br />
2006<br />
8 or fewer directors<br />
9 to 12<br />
13 or more<br />
Independent director representation stabilizes near 85%<br />
»<br />
» Independent directors make up 85% of all S&P 500 board members, up slightly from 84% last year. The ratio<br />
of independent directors to non-independent directors on S&P 500 boards is 5.4 to 1, with boards averaging<br />
9.1 independent directors and 1.7 non-independent directors. In 2006, 81% of directors were independent.<br />
»»<br />
As boards have become more independent over time, the CEO has emerged as the only<br />
non-independent director on most boards; the CEO is the only non-independent director on<br />
60% of S&P 500 boards, compared with 57% in 2011 and 39% in 2006.<br />
Annual director elections are now standard<br />
»<br />
» 92% of S&P 500 boards are declassified, unchanged from last year. The remaining boards have<br />
three-year terms.<br />
»»<br />
The move toward declassified boards has accelerated in recent years, often in response to shareholder<br />
demands; 56% of boards in 2006 and 76% in 2011 had annual director elections.<br />
»»<br />
We also have seen an increase in boards establishing policies requiring directors to offer their<br />
resignation if they fail to receive a majority vote from shareholders; 88% of boards have such policies<br />
today, up from 79% in 2011. While these policies have become widespread, boards retain the discretion<br />
to accept or decline a director’s resignation.<br />
14<br />
spencer stuart
Most boards have resignation policies for changing<br />
director status<br />
»<br />
» Consistent with the past several years, 85% of S&P 500 boards require directors who experience a<br />
change in employment status or significant change in job responsibilities to notify the chairman and/or<br />
the nominating committee and offer their resignation from the board. Typically, the chair or nominating<br />
committee has the discretion to accept or decline the resignation.<br />
»»<br />
37% of boards report having a policy requiring the CEO to submit his or her resignation from the board<br />
when the CEO’s employment with the company ends. In all cases, however, boards retain the discretion<br />
to accept or decline the resignation. This provision is somewhat more common than in 2011, when 32%<br />
of boards had such a policy.<br />
Majority of directors face restrictions on additional<br />
board service<br />
»<br />
» Nearly three-quarters of S&P 500 boards (74%) have established some limit on their directors’ ability to<br />
accept other corporate directorships, an increase from 27% in 2006. The prevalence of these restrictions<br />
has grown in response to concerns about directors becoming “overboarded,” with insufficient time to<br />
devote to board responsibilities.<br />
»»<br />
61% of boards set a numerical limit for other board service applying to all directors; of those, 5% cap<br />
additional directorships at two, 36% at three, 40% at four, and 19% at five or six. No company limits<br />
other directorships to one.<br />
»»<br />
40% of S&P 500 boards restrict the number of other audit committees on which their members may serve;<br />
97% of these boards allow audit committee members to serve on up to two other audit committees.<br />
»»<br />
20% of boards set restrictions for directors who are public company CEOs or are otherwise fully<br />
employed; most often, these directors are limited to two other outside public company boards. No<br />
board allows directors who are employed executives to serve on more than three additional boards.<br />
»»<br />
Among the 125 boards that do not specify a limit on other corporate directorships, 90% report that they<br />
require directors to notify the chairman prior to accepting an invitation to join another company board<br />
and/or encourage directors to “reasonably limit” their other board service.<br />
»»<br />
Most companies do not restrict their CEOs from serving on outside boards. Only 20% of S&P 500<br />
boards set a specific limit in their corporate governance guidelines on the CEO’s outside board service;<br />
97% of those boards limit CEOs to one or two outside boards. One board does not allow the company<br />
CEO to serve on any outside corporate boards.<br />
board index 2016 15
<strong>Board</strong> Composition<br />
The average director serves on two corporate boards<br />
»<br />
» On average, S&P 500 directors have 2.1 outside corporate board affiliations, although most directors<br />
aren’t restricted from serving on more. While the average has remained unchanged for the past five<br />
years, we’ve seen a decline in the number of directors serving on more than four boards; 88 directors<br />
(2%) today serve on five or six outside corporate boards, versus 165 (4%) in 2011.<br />
»»<br />
63% of independent directors have two or more outside affiliations; 11% have four or more. 15 directors<br />
(less than 1%) serve on six boards.<br />
Number of Corporate <strong>Board</strong> Affiliations for Independent Directors<br />
37% 30% 22% 11%<br />
1 board 2 boards 3 boards 4+ boards<br />
Director term limits rarely used as a tool to promote turnover<br />
»»<br />
19 S&P 500 boards (4%) set an explicit term limit for non-executive directors, a modest increase from<br />
2015 when 13 boards (3%) had director term limits. The use of term limits has been consistently low; the<br />
number of boards with term limits today is exactly the same as in 2011, 19 (4%). 65% of boards explicitly<br />
state in their corporate governance guidelines that they do not have term limits, and 31% do not<br />
mention term limits at all.<br />
»»<br />
Of the 19 boards with a specific term limit, nine cap director service at 15 years, four at 12 years, three at<br />
10 years, one at 18 years, and two at 20 years. The longest term limit is 20 years, and no board has a<br />
term limit less than 10 years.<br />
»»<br />
Rather than set term limits or a mandatory retirement age, many boards report that they consider<br />
whether individual directors should be re-nominated during the evaluation process.<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s with Term Limits<br />
Company Term limits Company Term limits<br />
Patterson Companies 20 years Varian Medical Systems 15 years<br />
Target Corporation 20 years Xcel Energy 15 years<br />
The Procter & Gamble Company 18 years AvalonBay Communities 12 years<br />
Alaska Air Group 15 years CBRE Group 12 years<br />
Frontier Communications Corporation 15 years International Flavors & Fragrances 12 years<br />
General Electric Company 15 years Wal-Mart Stores 12 years<br />
MasterCard 15 years Allegion Public Limited Company 10 years<br />
Qorvo 15 years Illumina 10 years<br />
Signet Jewelers Limited 15 years Juniper Networks 10 years<br />
The Walt Disney Company<br />
15 years<br />
16<br />
spencer stuart
ADDED PERSPECTIVE<br />
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> Governance Survey: Director term limits<br />
»»<br />
Scrutiny of board tenures has increased in recent years, but boards have not taken the step to<br />
establish director term limits as a means of limiting tenure. Only 4% of survey respondents said<br />
their boards have term limits today, and just 3% reported their boards are considering this step.<br />
»»<br />
6% of respondents report their board is considering other means of ensuring director turnover, such<br />
as a mandatory retirement age, annual evaluations and a robust self-assessment process.<br />
Independent directors are two years older than a decade ago<br />
»<br />
» The average age of S&P 500 independent directors increased by two years in the past decade, from 61 in<br />
2006 to 63 today, while the median age increased from 61 to 64. 19% of S&P 500 independent directors<br />
are 70 to 79, and 4% are younger than 50.<br />
»»<br />
Fewer boards than in the past have an average age of 59 or younger: 15% today compared with 28% a<br />
decade ago. By contrast, the number of older boards has increased. 37% of S&P 500 boards have an<br />
average age of 64 or older, compared with 19% of boards a decade ago, and 15 of today’s boards (3%)<br />
have an average age of 70 or greater, versus four (1%) a decade ago.<br />
»»<br />
Among new independent directors, the average age increased since last year. The new independent<br />
director class of 2016 has an average age of 57.3, compared with 56.8 in 2015. The median age increased<br />
from 57 to 58. The oldest new director elected in the 2015 proxy year is 77, and the youngest is 35. Eight<br />
boards added a new independent director aged 70 or older.<br />
Ages of Independent Directors<br />
2016 2011 2006<br />
Average age of all independent directors 63.0 62.4 61.0<br />
Youngest average board age 47 50 49<br />
Oldest average board age 76 72 75<br />
% of all S&P 500 boards with average age …<br />
59 and younger 15% 17% 28%<br />
60-63 48% 46% 53%<br />
64 and older 37% 37% 19%<br />
board index 2016 17
<strong>Board</strong> Composition<br />
Mandatory retirement ages keep rising<br />
»<br />
» Consistent with the past 10 years, about three-quarters (73%) of S&P 500 boards report having a<br />
mandatory retirement age for directors. 11% report that they do not have a mandatory retirement age,<br />
and 16% do not discuss mandatory retirement in their proxies.<br />
»»<br />
While the number of boards with mandatory retirement ages has remained consistent, retirement ages<br />
have continued to increase. 39% of boards have retirement ages of 75 or higher, compared with just 9%<br />
in 2006. Four boards have a retirement age of 80. In 2006, 38% set their retirement age at 70, or lower;<br />
today just 5% of boards have a retirement age of 70, and no board has set it lower than that.<br />
»»<br />
The most common mandatory retirement age is 72, set by 45% of S&P 500 boards, a decrease from 50%<br />
last year.<br />
Mandatory Retirement Age<br />
2016 2011 2006<br />
70 and younger 5% 16% 38%<br />
71 1% 1% 1%<br />
72 45% 55% 48%<br />
73 4% 5% 3%<br />
74 6% 3% 1%<br />
75 and older 39% 20% 9%<br />
N = <strong>Board</strong>s that have set a mandatory retirement age: 352 for 2016, 362 for 2011, 376 for 2006.<br />
Small decline in average board tenure<br />
»<br />
» The average tenure of S&P 500 boards is 8.3 years, a slight decrease from 8.7 five years ago. The median<br />
tenure has declined as well in that time, from 8.4 to 8.0.<br />
»»<br />
The majority of boards, 63%, have an average tenure between six and 10 years.<br />
»»<br />
19% of boards have an average tenure of 11 or more years, compared with 21% in 2015 and 19% in 2011.<br />
18% have an average tenure of five years or less, up from 17% last year.<br />
»»<br />
The longest average board tenure is 21 years, and the longest-tenured director has served 48 years.<br />
»»<br />
35% of independent directors have served on their boards for five years or less, 28% have served for<br />
six to 10 years, and 22% for 11 to 15 years. 15% of independent directors have served on their boards for<br />
16 years or more.<br />
»»<br />
With the average tenure for sitting CEOs at 7.2 years, most boards will serve with two CEOs.<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Average Tenure<br />
18% 63% 18% 1%<br />
5 years<br />
or less<br />
6 to 10<br />
years<br />
11 to 15<br />
years<br />
16 years<br />
or more<br />
18<br />
spencer stuart
Female representation on boards now tops 20%<br />
»<br />
» Women now constitute 21% of all S&P 500 directors. Female representation has increased from 15% a<br />
decade ago. On average, boards have 2.3 female directors, compared with 1.6 in 2006.<br />
»»<br />
Six S&P 500 boards (1%) have no women directors, a noteworthy decline from 2006, when 52 boards<br />
(11%) included no female members. More than three-quarters of boards (76%) include two or more<br />
women, a significant increase from 51% a decade ago and 58% five years ago. One-quarter of boards<br />
have three women directors, compared with just 12% of boards in 2011.<br />
»»<br />
24 S&P 500 companies (4.8%) had a woman serving as CEO as of our May 15, 2016, proxy cut-off date, an<br />
increase from 3.0% five years ago. Since then, one female CEO (Lauralee E. Martin) stepped down in 2016 and<br />
three announced plans to retire or step down in 2017 (Susan M. Cameron, Gracia C. Martore and Ursula Burns);<br />
and five women were named CEOs: Shira Goodman at Staples, Debra Crew at Reynolds American, Tricia Griffith<br />
at Progressive Corporation, Vicki Hollub at Occidental Petroleum and Pat Kampling at Alliant Energy.<br />
»»<br />
Companies led by women tend to have more female board directors than those led by men: 31% of directors<br />
on boards of companies with a female CEO are women, versus 21% for companies with a male CEO. When<br />
the female CEO is excluded, however, the gap narrows: 24% of the remaining directors are women.<br />
S&P 500 Female CEOs and Their <strong>Board</strong>s *<br />
Company CEO Total directors Women directors Women directors as %<br />
of total<br />
American Water Works Susan N. Story 9 5 56%<br />
TEGNA Gracia C. Martore 10 5 50%<br />
ULTA Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance Mary N. Dillon 11 5 45%<br />
General Motors Company Mary T. Barra 12 5 42%<br />
Xerox Corporation Ursula M. Burns 8 3 38%<br />
Hewlett-Packard Company Margaret C. Whitman 14 5 36%<br />
KeyCorp Elizabeth E. Mooney 14 5 36%<br />
Campbell Soup Company Denise M. Morrison 12 4 33%<br />
CMS Energy Corporation Patricia K. Poppe 12 4 33%<br />
Synchrony Financial Margaret M. Keane 9 3 33%<br />
Mondelez International Irene B. Rosenfeld 13 4 31%<br />
Mylan Heather Bresch 13 4 31%<br />
Yahoo! Marissa Mayer 13 4 31%<br />
General Dynamics Corporation Phebe N. Novakovic 10 3 30%<br />
PepsiCo Indra K. Nooyi 14 4 29%<br />
Lockheed Martin Corporation Marillyn A. Hewson 11 3 27%<br />
Sempra Energy Debra L. Reed 11 3 27%<br />
Duke Energy Corporation Lynn J. Good 12 3 25%<br />
HCP Lauralee E. Martin 8 2 25%<br />
Ventas Debra A. Cafaro 9 2 22%<br />
International Business Machines Corporation Virginia M. Rometty 14 3 21%<br />
Ross Stores Barbara Rentler 11 2 18%<br />
Oracle Corporation Safra A. Catz 12 2 17%<br />
Reynolds American Susan M. Cameron 13 2 15%<br />
Average % women directors for companies with female CEOs 31% **<br />
Average % women directors for companies with male CEOs 21%<br />
*<br />
Accurate as of each company’s most recent proxy released by May 15, 2016.<br />
**<br />
Excluding the CEO, the average is 24%.<br />
board index 2016 19
<strong>Board</strong> Composition<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s*<br />
nic/Latino<br />
Fewer minorities join boards; no change in minority<br />
representation overall<br />
»<br />
» Fewer minority directors (defined as African-American, Hispanic/Latino and Asian) were appointed to<br />
S&P 500 boards over the past year than the prior year. 15% of the 345 new independent directors are<br />
minorities, a decrease from 18% in 2015. Minority directors filled 53 vacant board seats. 8% of new<br />
directors are African-American, 5% are Hispanic/Latino, and 2% are of Asian descent.<br />
»»<br />
New minority directors are more likely than non-minority directors to be line and functional leaders or<br />
division/subsidiary presidents, 41% versus 20%, and less likely to be active or retired senior leaders<br />
(such as CEO, chair, president or COO), 24% versus 41%.<br />
»»<br />
Among the boards of the top 200 S&P 500 companies, the total number of minority directors has held<br />
steady at 15% since 2011, and the number of the top 200 companies with at least one minority director<br />
remains unchanged at 88%.<br />
»»<br />
Despite Asian increased Non-U.Sattention to the topic of board diversity, representation of minority directors at the top<br />
200 S&P 500 companies has not significantly changed over the past five to 10 years.<br />
––<br />
8.2% of directors are African-American, compared with 9.5% in 2011 and 9.2 in 2006. 75% of boards<br />
have at least one African-American director, a decline from 78% in 2011 and 80% in 2006.<br />
––<br />
4.8% of directors are Hispanic/Latino, up from 4.4 in 2011 and 3.6 in 2006. 47% of boards today have<br />
at least one Hispanic/Latino director, up from 45% in 2011 and 35% in 2006.<br />
––<br />
1.8% of directors are Asian (non-Indian), versus 1.4% in 2011 and 0.7% in 2006. 18% of boards have<br />
one or more Asian directors, up from 16% in 2011 and 7% in 2006.<br />
Minorities as % of Directors at Top 200 <strong>Board</strong>s<br />
77%<br />
8%<br />
5%<br />
2%<br />
8%<br />
All non-minorities<br />
African-American<br />
Hispanic/Latino<br />
Asian<br />
Non-U.S.<br />
Top 200 <strong>Board</strong>s with at Least One Minority Director<br />
88% 88% 88%<br />
75% 78% 80% 47% 45%<br />
35%<br />
2016<br />
2011<br />
2006<br />
18% 16%<br />
7%<br />
All minorities<br />
combined<br />
African-American<br />
Hispanic/Latino<br />
Asian<br />
20<br />
spencer stuart
Few top 200 companies led by minorities<br />
»<br />
» Nine (5%) of the top 200 S&P companies are led by African-American, Hispanic/Latino or Asian CEOs,<br />
three more than in 2015. In 2011, only five of the top 200 companies were led by minority CEOs.<br />
»»<br />
Similar to the pattern seen among companies led by women, companies led by minority CEOs have<br />
more minority directors than other companies. 24% of the directors for the nine companies with<br />
minority CEOs are minorities, compared with 14% of directors of companies with a non-minority CEO.<br />
However, minority representation drops to 17% when the CEO is excluded.<br />
Top 200 Minority-Led Companies and Their <strong>Board</strong>s *<br />
Company CEO Total directors Minority directors Minority directors<br />
as % of total<br />
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company Juan R. Luciano 12 6 50%<br />
Xerox Corporation Ursula M. Burns 8 3 38%<br />
Eaton Corporation Craig Arnold 13 4 31%<br />
NRG Energy Mauricio Gutierrez 10 3 30%<br />
American Express Company Kenneth I. Chenault 13 3 23%<br />
AbbVie Richard A. Gonzalez 9 2 22%<br />
Merck & Co. Kenneth C. Frazier 13 2 15%<br />
Carnival Corporation Arnold W. Donald 9 1 11%<br />
United Continental Holdings Oscar Munoz 14 1 7%<br />
Average % of minority directors for companies with minority CEOs 24% **<br />
Average % of minority directors for companies with non-minority CEOs 14%<br />
*<br />
Accurate as of each company’s most recent proxy released by May 15, 2016.<br />
**<br />
Excluding the CEO, the average is 17%.<br />
Just over half of the top 200 companies have directors from<br />
outside the U.S.<br />
»<br />
» More than half of the top 200 S&P 500 companies (53%) have at least one non-U.S. director, a small<br />
decline from 55% in 2015 but an increase from 45% in 2006.<br />
»»<br />
A total of 191 directors of non-U.S. origin serve on the boards of the top 200 companies, accounting for<br />
8% of all directors, consistent with the past five years. For the purposes of this report, directors of Indian<br />
descent are included within the non-U.S. group.<br />
»»<br />
International directors represent 33 different countries, but the majority of non-U.S. directors (58%)<br />
come from the following five countries: India (16%), the U.K. (12%), Canada (11%), Germany (11%)<br />
and France (8%).<br />
»»<br />
Among the S&P 500, 8% of all new independent director board seats were filled by directors from<br />
outside the U.S., a decrease from 9% last year. More than half of the new directors from outside the<br />
U.S. — 15 of 27 — are active or retired CEOs.<br />
board index 2016 21
<strong>Board</strong> Composition<br />
ADDED PERSPECTIVE<br />
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> Governance Survey: CEO succession planning<br />
»»<br />
Nearly one-quarter of respondents (24%) said their board formally discusses CEO succession two<br />
or three times a year, up from 15% last year. 13% report that the board addresses CEO succession<br />
four or more times per year, almost double the 2015 number of 7%. 60% of survey respondents said<br />
their board formally discusses CEO succession annually, 3% address succession less than once a year.<br />
»»<br />
69% of respondents have contingency and long-term succession plans in place, while 25% have a<br />
contingency succession plan only. Three companies have only a long-term plan, and two<br />
companies have no CEO succession plan in place.<br />
»»<br />
This year, our survey delved more deeply into boards’ processes for understanding the readiness<br />
of potential CEO succession candidates:<br />
• 91% said the board’s process includes a briefing on potential successors’ gaps in readiness.<br />
• 78% said the board is familiar with the development plans for addressing individuals’ gaps.<br />
• 71% said internal succession candidates undergo formal assessments.<br />
• 53% said the board defines the desired future criteria for the CEO profile as part of its process.<br />
»»<br />
42% said the process for reviewing potential internal successors is supported by an external adviser.<br />
»»<br />
36% report that their succession process includes gaining insight on potential external candidates.<br />
Getting to know internal candidates<br />
»»<br />
66% of respondents said their boards have a formal process for reviewing internal succession candidates.<br />
• 99% get to know internal succession candidates through regular interactions during board<br />
meetings and presentations.<br />
• 34% schedule individual meetings between board members and candidates.<br />
• 8% assign formal board mentors.<br />
• 7% said they use other methods, such as company events and feedback from an external adviser.<br />
The number of CEOs serving on an outside public company<br />
board remains at historic low<br />
»<br />
» Only 43% of S&P 500 CEOs serve on an outside corporate board in addition to their own board, the<br />
same as in 2015, when the number of CEOs with outside boards hit a new low. A decade ago, 55% of<br />
CEOs served on at least one outside board.<br />
»»<br />
35% of CEOs serve on one outside board, and 8% serve on two. Only two CEOs have three outside<br />
board assignments. In 2006, 19% of CEOs served on two outside boards and 4% (20) served on three.<br />
One CEO served on four outside boards.<br />
»»<br />
CEOs serve on an average of 0.5 other corporate boards, compared with 0.6 in 2011 and 0.8 in 2006.<br />
22<br />
spencer stuart
27% of boards have a truly independent chair, a small decline<br />
from last year<br />
»»<br />
48% of S&P 500 boards split the chair and CEO roles between two individuals, the same as in 2015.<br />
During the past decade, more boards have evaluated their leadership structures, with a growing number<br />
opting to separate the roles. 41% of S&P 500 boards in 2011 and 33% in 2006 split the roles.<br />
»»<br />
132 boards (27% versus 29% in 2015) have a truly independent chair — an independent director or<br />
e Company a former executive who has met applicable NYSE or NASDAQ rules for independence over time.<br />
er CEO or current Although executive their number Outside decreased relat-from<br />
last year, boards are more likely to have an independent chair<br />
than five and 10 years ago, when 21% and 10% of boards, respectively, had truly independent chairs.<br />
Eight of the independent chairs today are founders or former CEOs or COOs who met independence<br />
standards over time.<br />
»»<br />
13% of chairs are company executives other than the CEO, and 6% had been the CEO and are no longer<br />
a company executive.<br />
»»<br />
Among the 97 boards where the chair is separate but not independent, 89 (92%) have identified a lead<br />
or presiding independent director.<br />
Chairman’s Relationship with the Company<br />
52%<br />
27%<br />
19%<br />
1%<br />
1%<br />
Current CEO<br />
Independent director<br />
Former CEO or current executive<br />
Outside related director<br />
Role in transition<br />
ADDED PERSPECTIVE<br />
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> Governance Survey: The chairman and CEO split<br />
»»<br />
12% of respondents said their board split the chairman and CEO roles in the last proxy year, while<br />
33% said their board has discussed splitting the roles within the next five years.<br />
»»<br />
Of those that have recently separated (or expect to separate) the chair and CEO roles, 72% say the<br />
primary reason for the change is a CEO transition, while 20% believe the chair/CEO split<br />
represents the best governance.<br />
board index 2016 23
<strong>Board</strong> Composition<br />
More than half of independent chairs are retired<br />
senior executives<br />
»<br />
» 51% of the 132 independent chairs of S&P 500 companies are retired chairmen, vice chairmen, presidents<br />
or CEOs. Only 5% of independent chairs are active executives in these roles, including one current publiccompany<br />
CEO. In 2011, 52% of chairs were retired senior executives and 9% were active.<br />
»»<br />
14% of the independent chairs are investors or investment managers, and another 12% are other<br />
corporate executives, active or retired, including division presidents and line and functional leaders.<br />
»»<br />
The remaining independent chairs are financial executives, bankers/investment bankers and retired<br />
public accounting executives (12%); academics and nonprofit executives (2%); and others, including<br />
lawyers and consultants (4%).<br />
»»<br />
Independent chairman are older on average than their fellow directors: 66.1 versus 63.1.<br />
»»<br />
There are 10 women serving as independent chairs, 8% of all independent chairs.<br />
Independent Chairman Backgrounds<br />
51%<br />
14%<br />
12%<br />
5%<br />
12%<br />
2%<br />
4%<br />
Retired chair/president/CEO<br />
Investor/investment manager<br />
Active/retired other corporate executive<br />
Active chair/president/CEO<br />
Bankers/financial executives/CFOs/public accounting<br />
Academics/nonprofit executives<br />
Others<br />
»»<br />
The average tenure for current independent chairs is 4 years. 57% have been in the role for three years or<br />
less, including 29% who have served as chair for one year or less. On the other end of the spectrum,<br />
31% of independent chairmen have served in their roles for six or more years. The longest-serving<br />
S&P 500 independent chairman has been in the position for 18 years.<br />
»»<br />
92% of the independent chairmen previously served as directors on the board before becoming chair,<br />
serving 8.4 years on average before moving into the chairman role.<br />
Independent Chairman Tenure<br />
29% 28% 12% 21%<br />
0 to 1<br />
year<br />
2 to 3<br />
years<br />
4 to 5<br />
years<br />
6 to 9<br />
years<br />
10%<br />
10 or more<br />
years<br />
Average: 4.0 years<br />
N=132 independent chairmen<br />
24<br />
spencer stuart
Despite decline, most boards have a lead or presiding director<br />
»»<br />
87% of S&P 500 boards report having a lead or presiding director, nearly all of whom (98%) are<br />
identified by name in the proxy.<br />
»»<br />
The number of lead and presiding directors has declined over the past decade as more boards named<br />
independent chairs. 92% of S&P 500 boards had a lead or presiding director in 2011, down from 96%<br />
in 2006.<br />
»»<br />
1% of boards rotate the role among independent directors and committee chairs compared to 5% of<br />
boards five years ago.<br />
»»<br />
Lead directors are more common than presiding directors; of the 417 boards with one of these titles,<br />
71% have lead directors and 29% have presiding directors, including those identified as “chair” of<br />
executive sessions. This represents a change from a decade ago, when 64% of boards had a presiding<br />
director and 36% had a lead director.<br />
»»<br />
74 independent chairs are also named as the lead or presiding director. Another seven boards report<br />
having a lead/presiding director in addition to the independent chair.<br />
»»<br />
Only five S&P 500 boards do not report having a form of independent board leadership — neither an<br />
independent chairman nor a lead/presiding director. Often, this is a temporary situation during a<br />
leadership transition and restructuring.<br />
Lead Versus Presiding Directors<br />
2016 2011 2006<br />
Lead directors 71% 54% 36%<br />
Presiding directors 29% 46% 64%<br />
»»<br />
328 boards (81%) disclosed how long their lead/presiding director has been serving in the role, reporting<br />
an average tenure of 3.7 years. 33% have served in the role one year or less, 36% have served for two to<br />
four years while 31% have been serving for five years or more.<br />
»»<br />
Retired CEOs, presidents and/or chairs are most likely to serve as a lead or presiding director; 47% of<br />
lead/presiding directors are retired senior executives. 11% are investors or investment managers, and<br />
another 11% are active or retired other corporate executives. Only 10% of lead/presiding directors are<br />
active CEOs, presidents and/or chairs.<br />
board index 2016 25
<strong>Board</strong> Composition<br />
Lead and Presiding Director Backgrounds *<br />
47%<br />
11%<br />
11%<br />
10%<br />
5%<br />
5%<br />
4%<br />
4%<br />
3%<br />
Retired chair/president/CEO/COO/vice chairman<br />
Investor/investment manager<br />
Other corporate executives<br />
Active chair/president/CEO/COO/vice chairman<br />
Academic/nonprofit<br />
Banker/investment banker<br />
Financial executives/CFOs/treasurers/public accounting executives<br />
Consultant/other<br />
Lawyer<br />
N = 405 lead or presiding directors identified by name<br />
*<br />
All active and retired unless where specifically stated.<br />
ADDED PERSPECTIVE<br />
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> Governance Survey: Lead director<br />
»»<br />
81% of survey respondents reported that the lead or presiding director is selected by the full<br />
board. The lead or presiding director is chosen by the nominating and governance committee at<br />
26% of responding companies. Three boards reported that the CEO selects the lead director, and<br />
on one board, the outgoing lead director names a successor. Among the 14% of “other”<br />
responses, most indicated that the independent directors select the lead director.<br />
»»<br />
Among boards with a lead or presiding director, 46% said there is no set term length for the<br />
position. Of those that that define some limit, 19% have a one-year term, 6% have a two-year term<br />
and 4% have a three-year term. Other approaches include a three-to-five-year term guideline, a<br />
five-year term or an understanding that the board will consider rotating the position every two years.<br />
»»<br />
90% said the lead/presiding director’s term is renewable.<br />
26<br />
spencer stuart
<strong>Board</strong> Organization and Process<br />
2016 Snapshot<br />
71 %<br />
of boards have more<br />
than 3 committees<br />
99 % of boards conduct an<br />
evaluation on the full<br />
board of directors<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s met<br />
an average of<br />
8.4<br />
times<br />
up from<br />
8.1<br />
last year<br />
Only<br />
6 %<br />
of audit committee chairs<br />
are active CEOs and chairs<br />
versus 18% a decade ago<br />
Modest rise in the average number of board meetings<br />
»<br />
meetings rose from 7.0 last year to 8.0. The annual meeting average includes regularly scheduled<br />
meetings and special meetings. These meetings may be in-person or telephonic.<br />
»»<br />
The majority of boards, 54%, met six to nine times. Ten boards met 19 times or more.<br />
» <strong>Board</strong>s met an average of 8.4 times, up from 8.1 last year and 8.2 five years ago. The median number of<br />
Distribution of <strong>Board</strong> Meetings *<br />
20% 54% 15% 11%<br />
5 or fewer<br />
meetings<br />
6 to 9 10 to 12 13 or more<br />
*<br />
Includes in-person and telephonic regular and special meetings.<br />
board index 2016 27
oard organization and process<br />
ttees<br />
or more<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s have four committees on average<br />
»<br />
» A majority of S&P 500 boards, 71%, have more than the three NYSE-mandated committees<br />
(compensation, audit and nominating/governance).<br />
»»<br />
<strong>Board</strong>s have an average of 4.2 standing committees and a median of four committees, which has<br />
remained consistent during the past decade.<br />
»»<br />
21% of boards have five standing committees, and 14% have six or more.<br />
»»<br />
The most common committees beyond the compensation, audit and nominating/governance<br />
committees are the executive committee (33%) and finance committee (31%).<br />
»»<br />
Several committees have become more prevalent in the past 10 years, including risk, science/<br />
technology, and environment, health and safety. In 2006, for example, 4% of boards had a risk<br />
committee, compared with 11% today. By contrast, the number of public policy/social & corporate<br />
responsibility committees have declined somewhat.<br />
Number of Standing Committees<br />
29%<br />
36%<br />
21%<br />
11%<br />
3%<br />
3 or fewer<br />
4<br />
5<br />
6<br />
7 or more<br />
Prevalence and Independence of Standing Committees<br />
% with this committee % composed entirely of<br />
independent directors<br />
2016 2011 2016 2011<br />
Audit 100% 100% 100% 100%<br />
Compensation 100% * 100% 100% 99.6%<br />
Nominating/governance 99.6% ** 98.8% 99.8% 99.6%<br />
Executive 33% 35% 4% 3%<br />
Finance *** 31% 33% 78% 70%<br />
Risk 11% 8% 85% 74%<br />
Public policy/social & corporate responsibility 10% 14% 88% 84%<br />
Science & technology 9% 6% 88% 77%<br />
Environment, health & safety 7% 6% 80% 86%<br />
Legal/compliance 5% 5% 91% 87%<br />
Strategy & planning 2% 3% 60% 80%<br />
Investment/pension 3% 2% 75% 83%<br />
Acquisitions/corporate development 2% 2% 50% 64%<br />
*<br />
14 boards have a combined compensation and nominating committee. They are counted as separate committees for the purpose of this analysis.<br />
**<br />
Includes one board with a standing corporate governance committee in addition to the nominating committee. Controlled companies are not<br />
required to have nominating committees.<br />
***<br />
11 boards have a combined finance and risk management committee. They are counted as separate committees for the purpose of this analysis.<br />
28<br />
spencer stuart
ADDED PERSPECTIVE<br />
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> Governance Survey: Cybersecurity<br />
»»<br />
Major information security breaches to business or government systems regularly hit the news,<br />
and boards increasingly recognize that cyber crime is a risk management issue that affects the<br />
entire organization and belongs on the board agenda.<br />
»»<br />
One-quarter of survey respondents said the full board is responsible for cybersecurity oversight,<br />
while 75% said the board has assigned cybersecurity oversight to a specific board committee. Of<br />
those, 74% said the audit committee oversees cybersecurity risk, and 14% said the risk committee<br />
is responsible. Responsibility for cyber risk falls to the technology committee for 5% of boards.<br />
»»<br />
88% of respondents said the board or a committee has discussed the company’s crisis response<br />
plan to a cyber breach within the past year.<br />
Audit committees average more than eight meetings<br />
»<br />
» Audit committees averaged 8.6 meetings, a slight decrease from 8.8 last year and roughly one meeting<br />
less than the 2006 average of 9.5.<br />
»»<br />
68% of S&P 500 audit committees met eight or more times annually, including 48% that had eight, nine<br />
or 10 meetings. 20% of audit committees met 11 times or more, compared with 37% a decade ago.<br />
»»<br />
Compensation and nominating/governance committees meet less often, averaging 6.1 and 4.8 meetings<br />
annually, respectively.<br />
»»<br />
43% of compensation committees held five or six annual meetings.<br />
»»<br />
74% of nominating/governance committees met five times or fewer annually, with 29% meeting<br />
four times.<br />
Distribution of Committee Meetings *<br />
Audit committee Compensation committee Nominating/governance committee<br />
3 or fewer meetings 1% 7% 20%<br />
4 5% 14% 29%<br />
5 11% 23% 25%<br />
6 6% 20% 13%<br />
7 9% 16% 9%<br />
8-10 48% 15% 4%<br />
11-13 16% 4% 0%<br />
14 or more 4% 1% 0%<br />
Average 8.6 6.1 4.8<br />
Median 9.0 6.0 5.0<br />
Maximum 24 16 19<br />
*<br />
Includes in-person and telephonic regular and special meetings.<br />
board index 2016 29
oard organization and process<br />
Finance professionals continue to grow as a source for audit<br />
committee leadership<br />
»<br />
» 28% of audit committee chairmen are active/retired financial executives, including CFOs and treasurers,<br />
an increase from 21% in 2011 and 13% in 2006. Retired CEOs, chairs, presidents and COOs make up the<br />
next largest source, accounting for 27% of audit committee chairs. Retired public accounting executives<br />
are the next largest source, representing 11% of audit committee chairs.<br />
»»<br />
Meanwhile, active CEOs, chairs, presidents and COOs are much less likely to head an audit committee<br />
than in the past, reflecting the increased workload and demands of audit committee service. Just 6% of<br />
S&P 500 audit committee chairs are fully employed/active CEOs, chairs, presidents and COOs,<br />
compared with 18% a decade ago.<br />
»»<br />
25% of all S&P 500 directors have been identified as audit committee financial experts, compared with<br />
20% of directors in 2006.<br />
Increase seen in number of women leading audit, compensation<br />
and nominating committees<br />
»<br />
» The representation of women in committee leadership roles increased slightly since last year. Women now<br />
chair 20% of nominating/governance committees, 15% of audit committees and 11% of compensation<br />
committees, compared with 16%, 13% and 10%, respectively, last year. In 2011, women chaired 13% of<br />
audit committees, 8% of compensation committees and 16% of nominating/governance committees.<br />
»»<br />
Retired CEOs, chairs, presidents and COOs are the most common backgrounds of compensation and<br />
nominating/governance committee chairs; 43% of compensation committee chairs and 31% of<br />
nominating/governance committee chairs are retired top senior executives.<br />
»»<br />
Active CEOs and other top senior executives are more likely to serve as chair of the compensation and<br />
nominating/governance committees than the audit committee. 14% of directors with these profiles<br />
serve as compensation committee chair, and 13% as nominating/governance committee chair. Five<br />
years ago, 20% of compensation committee chairs and 15% of nominating/governance committee<br />
chairs were filled by active CEOs, chairs, presidents and COOs.<br />
30<br />
spencer stuart
ions<br />
es and directors<br />
Committee Chairman Backgrounds *<br />
% of chairmen<br />
Audit committee Compensation committee Nominating/governance<br />
committee<br />
Retired chair/president/CEO/vice chairman 27% 43% 31%<br />
Active chair/president/CEO/vice chairman 6% 14% 13%<br />
Financial executive/CFO/treasurer 28% 2% 2%<br />
Public accounting executive 11% 0% 1%<br />
Investor/investment manager 7% 11% 13%<br />
Other corporate executive 9% 16% 14%<br />
Academic/nonprofit 3% 5% 10%<br />
Consultant 3% 3% 5%<br />
Banker/investment banker 6% 4% 3%<br />
Lawyer 0% 1% 5%<br />
Other 0% 1% 3%<br />
Total number of chairmen listed in proxies 475 473 473<br />
*<br />
Except where noted, all categories include active and retired executives.<br />
Nearly all boards conduct an annual performance evaluation<br />
»»<br />
All but seven Full S&P board 500 only boards (99%) report conducting some sort of annual performance evaluation.<br />
»»<br />
More than half of boards (54%) evaluate the full board and committees, and nearly one-third (32%)<br />
evaluate the full board, committees and individual directors annually. This represents an increase from<br />
2011, when 29% examined the performance of the board, committees and individual directors as part of<br />
luations in their their proxies annual or evaluations. corporate<br />
»»<br />
Thirteen boards disclosed that they engaged an independent third party to facilitate and conduct all or a<br />
portion of the evaluation process.<br />
<strong>Board</strong>, Committee and Director Evaluations<br />
54%<br />
32%<br />
10%<br />
4%<br />
Full board and committees<br />
Full board, committees and directors<br />
Full board only<br />
Full board and directors<br />
N = 475 companies; 7 others did not mention evaluations in their proxies or corporate governance guidelines.<br />
board index 2016 31
oard organization and process<br />
ADDED PERSPECTIVE<br />
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> Governance Survey: <strong>Board</strong> evaluations<br />
»»<br />
35% of survey respondents report that they assess the full board, board committees and<br />
individual directors as part of a board evaluation. 66% evaluate the full board and committees,<br />
but not individual directors. 11% said only an evaluation of the full board is conducted. (Note:<br />
Respondents could select multiple responses.)<br />
»»<br />
Evaluations are most often conducted by a director, typically the chairman, lead director or a<br />
committee chair, according to 65% of respondents. A wide range of internal and external parties<br />
are also tapped to conduct board assessments, including in-house and external legal counsel, the<br />
corporate secretary and board consulting firms. 35% use director self-assessments, and 15%<br />
include peer reviews.<br />
ADDED PERSPECTIVE<br />
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> Governance Survey: Shareholder engagement<br />
»»<br />
Proxy access emerged as the top issue<br />
formally raised by shareholders during Issues formally raised by shareholders in 2016 *<br />
the most recent proxy year, accounting for<br />
19% of shareholder contacts, followed by<br />
inquiries related to director tenure (11%).<br />
Proxy access<br />
Director tenure<br />
Independent board chair<br />
19%<br />
11%<br />
10%<br />
»»<br />
Other topics on the minds of shareholders<br />
were CEO compensation (10%), board<br />
chair independence (10%) and “say on<br />
pay” (9%). <strong>Board</strong> refreshment and<br />
company political contributions and<br />
activities each accounted for 7% of<br />
shareholder contacts.<br />
»»<br />
As in past years, public and private pension<br />
funds were the most likely to initiate contact<br />
with the boards, although they represented<br />
a smaller share of the total contacts than in<br />
the past. Accounting for 39% of the<br />
inquiries (versus 51% in 2015), pension<br />
funds were most likely to contact boards<br />
about proxy access, director tenure and<br />
board chair independence.<br />
CEO compensation 10%<br />
Say on pay 9%<br />
Disclosure of political contributions/activities 7%<br />
<strong>Board</strong> refreshment 7%<br />
Company strategy 6%<br />
Shareholder engagement approach 5%<br />
Director slate 4%<br />
Strategic alternatives (e.g., M&A, divestiture) 3%<br />
Other 8%<br />
Sources of shareholder contacts *<br />
Public/private pension fund 39%<br />
Mutual fund 26%<br />
Activist shareholder 17%<br />
Hedge fund/private equity 6%<br />
Other 11%<br />
*<br />
Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.<br />
32<br />
spencer stuart
ADDED PERSPECTIVE (continued)<br />
»»<br />
Inquiries from mutual funds, which<br />
represented 26% of shareholder contacts<br />
(an increase from 16% last year), tended to<br />
be about proxy access, CEO compensation,<br />
director tenure and board refreshment.<br />
»»<br />
Activist shareholders accounted for 17% of<br />
the inquiries, and their top issues were proxy<br />
access, companies’ political contributions/<br />
activities and strategic alternatives.<br />
Responsible for representing the board in nonroutine<br />
matters with the public/investors *<br />
Chairman/CEO (if combined) 46%<br />
CEO (if split) 32%<br />
Lead director 30%<br />
Chairman (if split) 18%<br />
Other 26%<br />
*<br />
Multiple answers allowed. Others included CFO, head of investor<br />
relations, general counsel and chairs of the applicable committees.<br />
»»<br />
Some 83% percent of respondents said<br />
management or the board proactively<br />
reached out to the company's large institutional investors or largest shareholders, an increase<br />
from 70% the year prior. The most common topic about which companies engaged with<br />
shareholders was proxy access (52%), an increase from 33% in 2015. Other topics boards<br />
discussed with large institutional investors and large shareholders included say on pay (51%),<br />
CEO compensation (40%), director tenure (30%), board refreshment (27%), shareholder<br />
engagement approach (27%) and chairman independence (24%).<br />
»»<br />
Survey respondents also wrote in more than a dozen additional topics, including majority/cumulative<br />
voting, disclosure enhancements, environmental issues and gender pay equity.<br />
»»<br />
Despite the growing interest by shareholders in board composition, only 3% of survey<br />
respondents reported that their companies’ large institutional shareholders recommended<br />
changes to board composition.<br />
»»<br />
39% of respondents reported that they were contacted formally by large institutional investors<br />
and/or largest shareholders specifically regarding a governance-related topic.<br />
»»<br />
For most companies responding to the survey, the CEO is responsible for representing the board<br />
in non-routine matters with the public and investors: 46% said the chairman/CEO had the<br />
responsibility for representing the board, and 32% said the CEO had the responsibility when there<br />
was a separate chair. Another 30% said the lead director represented the board with investors and<br />
the public. 18% said the non-CEO chairman had the responsibility.<br />
board index 2016 33
oard organization and process<br />
Director Compensation<br />
2016 Snapshot<br />
3<br />
Average per-director<br />
compensation rose<br />
%<br />
to<br />
$285,065<br />
76 % of S&P 500 boards<br />
provide stock grants<br />
to directors in addition to<br />
paying a cash retainer<br />
Annual retainers<br />
grew by<br />
6 % last year<br />
Additional compensation for<br />
independent chairmen averages<br />
$165,112<br />
a 2% decrease<br />
Average total director compensation grows by 3%<br />
»<br />
» The average total compensation for S&P 500 directors is $285,065, 3% higher than the 2015 average.<br />
When premium compensation for the independent chairman is excluded, the average total<br />
compensation per director falls to $280,389.<br />
»»<br />
Over time, the compensation mix for directors has evolved, with more stock grants and fewer stock<br />
options. Today, stock grants represent 54% of total director compensation, versus 48% five years ago,<br />
while stock options represent 6% of compensation today, down from 10% five years ago. Cash accounts<br />
for 38% of director compensation, versus 39% in 2011.<br />
»»<br />
73% of boards have deferred compensation plans.<br />
34<br />
spencer stuart
Breakdown of Director Compensation *<br />
54%<br />
6%<br />
38%<br />
2%<br />
Stock awards<br />
Option grants<br />
Cash fees **<br />
All other compensation ***<br />
*<br />
Based on non-employee director compensation tables in 477 proxies for fiscal year 2016. Includes all board and committee retainers and meeting fees, non-executive chairman and<br />
lead/presiding director supplemental fees when applicable, the value of equity compensation and all other compensation paid to non-employee directors in 2015. Retiring and new<br />
directors are included when paid compensation for at least three quarters of the year.<br />
**<br />
Includes deferred compensation amounts.<br />
***<br />
Includes, for example, insurance premiums, charitable award programs and incremental cost to company of products provided.<br />
Changes in Non-employee Director Compensation<br />
% of boards paying this type Average paid % of change in value<br />
Type of compensation 2016 2011 2016 2011 2011-16<br />
<strong>Board</strong> retainer * 99.6% 99.2% $118,521 $88,858 33%<br />
<strong>Board</strong> meeting fee 16% 37% $2,155 $2,284 -6%<br />
Committee chair retainer 95% 91% $15,370 $12,476 23%<br />
Committee member retainer 41% 37% $7,947 $7,917 less than 1%<br />
Committee member meeting fee 21% 35% $1,677 $1,635 3%<br />
Stock option program 14% 28% n/a n/a n/a<br />
Stock grants paid in addition to retainer 76% 77% n/a n/a n/a<br />
*<br />
Dollar amounts for retainer do not include boards that do not pay a retainer or boards that do not provide a dollar value equivalent for the retainer<br />
equity amount.<br />
6% increase in average annual board retainer<br />
»<br />
» The average annual retainer for S&P 500 directors is $118,521, which is 6% more than in 2015 and 86%<br />
more than in 2006, without adjusting for inflation. During the past decade, one-year increases have<br />
ranged from as little as 1% to as much as 11%. The median annual retainer, $100,000, is double the<br />
median in 2006, $50,000.<br />
»»<br />
Half of boards provide an annual retainer of $100,000 or more, up from 29% in 2011 and 15% in 2006.<br />
»»<br />
90 boards (18%) pay a retainer of $200,000 or more, compared with 42 boards (9%) in 2011 and 11<br />
boards (4%) in 2006.<br />
»»<br />
On the other end of the spectrum, 3% of boards today have retainers less than $50,000, compared with<br />
14% five years ago and 38% a decade ago.<br />
»»<br />
The highest annual retainer is $325,000, which is paid by a board that does not provide meeting<br />
attendance fees. Three companies provide no retainer; one of these pays $900 per meeting, one pays<br />
$15,000 per meeting (not to exceed $60,000 per year), and one only provides a stock option grant.<br />
»»<br />
Our research has shown that four boards have reduced director compensation for the upcoming fiscal year in<br />
response to pressure on the company share price and market conditions. Similarly, four boards have capped<br />
board compensation by placing a dollar limit on the value of equity compensation provided to directors.<br />
board index 2016 35
oard organization and process<br />
Annual <strong>Board</strong> Retainers and Yearly Increases<br />
$120,000<br />
14% 14%<br />
2016 annual board retainer<br />
Past years annual board retainer<br />
Yearly percentage increase<br />
$100,000<br />
12%<br />
11%<br />
$80,000<br />
$60,000<br />
$40,000<br />
8%<br />
9%<br />
5%<br />
9%<br />
6% 6%<br />
5%<br />
4%<br />
$20,000<br />
0<br />
2004<br />
2005<br />
2006<br />
2007<br />
2008<br />
2009<br />
1%<br />
2010<br />
2011<br />
2012<br />
2013<br />
2014<br />
2015<br />
2016<br />
Use of meeting fees for director compensation hits new low<br />
»<br />
» Only 78 S&P 500 boards (16%) pay board meeting attendance fees in 2016, down from 21% last year,<br />
and 57% in 2006.<br />
»»<br />
The average board meeting attendance fee increased to $2,155 from $2,041 last year. Fees range from a<br />
low of $900 to a high of $15,000 at one company, where meeting fees are paid in lieu of a retainer and<br />
capped at $60,000 per year. 38% of companies pay $1,500 per meeting, 29% pay $2,000 and 21% pay<br />
more than $2,000.<br />
»»<br />
15 boards (3%) pay a lower fee for telephonic meetings. The average telephonic meeting fee is $1,197.<br />
Two boards only pay a telephonic board meeting fee.<br />
»»<br />
Among the boards that pay meeting fees, 25 boards compensate directors for meetings in addition to<br />
regularly scheduled board meetings; the fee for meetings in excess of regularly scheduled board<br />
meetings averages $2,068. Seven other boards compensate directors only for attendance at special<br />
board meetings. The average special board meeting fee is $2,000.<br />
36<br />
spencer stuart
Three-quarters of boards grant stock to directors as<br />
part of compensation<br />
»<br />
» 76% of S&P 500 boards provide stock grants to directors in addition to paying a cash retainer, compared<br />
with 64% a decade ago. The average targeted dollar value of annual stock grants is $155,328.<br />
»»<br />
By comparison, stock options for directors have become much less common. 14% of S&P 500<br />
companies now offer option plans, compared with 51% in 2006. The average targeted value of annual<br />
stock option grants is $95,402.<br />
»»<br />
51% of boards allow directors to choose to receive their compensation in cash, stock or stock units, but<br />
only 4% offer stock options as an alternative choice.<br />
»»<br />
Eight boards, 2% of the total, pay director retainers fully in stock.<br />
»»<br />
91% of boards disclose having share ownership guidelines for directors, which are meant to align<br />
directors’ interests with those of stockholders. A decade ago, 62% disclosed director share ownership<br />
guidelines. Typically, these guidelines require directors to own a certain number of shares or a multiple<br />
of the retainer value within a specified number of years.<br />
Equity Compensation<br />
% of S&P 500 boards<br />
2016 2011 2006<br />
Stock option program exists 14% 28% 51%<br />
Equity paid in addition to retainer 76% 77% 64%<br />
Equity paid as a part of retainer 22% 18% 21%<br />
Director can elect to receive compensation in cash, stock, or stock units 51% 57% 60%<br />
Director can elect to receive compensation in stock options 4% 5% 7%<br />
Retainer paid fully in stock 2% 2% 3%<br />
Most boards provide a premium for board leadership service<br />
»<br />
» 95% of the 132 independent chairmen of S&P 500 boards receive an additional fee, which ranges from $25,000<br />
to $820,546 and averages $165,112. The median premium paid to independent chairmen is $150,000.<br />
»»<br />
65% of the 417 S&P 500 boards with a lead or presiding director provide additional compensation to<br />
directors serving in those roles, compared with 61% of boards one year ago.<br />
»»<br />
Lead directors are more likely than presiding directors to receive additional compensation: 80% versus<br />
27%. The average lead director premium is $33,565, 5% higher than the $31,848 average premium for<br />
presiding directors.<br />
»»<br />
Supplemental compensation for lead and presiding directors ranges from $6,000 to $175,000 and<br />
averages $33,354 for the combined roles.<br />
board index 2016 37
oard organization and process<br />
Nearly all boards provide extra compensation for chairing<br />
a committee<br />
»<br />
» 95% of S&P 500 boards included in our study provide a retainer to committee chairmen, an increase<br />
from 91% in 2011 and 84% in 2006. Among these boards, 86% pay a higher retainer to the audit<br />
committee chair, and 58% pay more to the compensation committee chair.<br />
»»<br />
The average retainer for all committee chairs is $15,370, an increase from last year’s average of $14,399.<br />
»»<br />
Retainers for audit and compensation committee chairs average $24,989 and $20,916, respectively.<br />
»<br />
» The lowest committee chair retainer is $3,000, while the highest committee chair retainer — paid to an<br />
audit chair — is $75,000.<br />
Compensation for committee service has become more common<br />
»»<br />
41% of boards pay a retainer for committee member service, averaging $8,947. A decade ago, 29% of<br />
boards provided a retainer for committee service, which averaged $6,431.<br />
»»<br />
87% provide a different retainer for audit committee service, which averages $13,015.<br />
»»<br />
39% of boards now provide a higher premium for compensation committee service, an increase from<br />
24% in 2011 and 8% in 2006. The average compensation committee member retainer is $11,851.<br />
Committee Retainers<br />
Average committee retainers<br />
% of boards paying this type<br />
2016 2011 2016 2011<br />
All committee members $8,947 $7,917 41% 37%<br />
Compensation committee members $11,851 $10,600 39% 24%<br />
Audit committee members $13,015 $10,796 87% 89%<br />
All committee chairs $15,370 $12,476 95% 91%<br />
Compensation committee chairs $20,916 $16,761 58% 40%<br />
Audit committee chairs $24,989 $21,382 86% 86%<br />
One-fifth of boards pay committee meeting fees<br />
»<br />
» Similar to board meeting attendance fees, committee meeting fees have declined as a component of<br />
director compensation. 21% of S&P 500 boards pay committee meeting fees, down from 26% last year and<br />
59% a decade ago. The average committee meeting fee is $1,677, a $1 less than last year’s average.<br />
»»<br />
12% of the 99 boards that provide committee meeting fees pay a higher amount for audit committee<br />
meetings than for other committee meetings. The $2,392 average audit committee meeting fee is 43%<br />
higher than the average for all committees. Just five companies pay a higher meeting fee for<br />
compensation committee meetings, averaging $2,300.<br />
»»<br />
16% of the boards providing committee meeting fees pay a different amount for telephonic meetings,<br />
which averages $911. One board pays a higher fee for telephonic audit committee meetings, $2,000.<br />
»»<br />
Only three boards (1%) pay meeting fees to committee chairs, compared with 11% 10 years ago. The<br />
average chair committee meeting fee is $2,550.<br />
38<br />
spencer stuart
Small number of boards provide extra compensation for special<br />
committee service<br />
»»<br />
Seven boards (1%) reported providing additional compensation to directors serving on a special<br />
committee. Supplemental retainers for service on special committees ranged in amounts from<br />
$10,000 to $22,500.<br />
»»<br />
Among boards that disclosed the purposes of the special committees, reasons included: addressing<br />
shareholder demands (three boards), CEO search or succession planning (one board), overseeing<br />
equity investments (one board), SEC and internal investigation (one board), and mergers and<br />
acquisitions (one board).<br />
Director compensation in healthcare sector tops S&P 500<br />
average by 29%<br />
»<br />
» Director compensation within the healthcare sector averages $369,080, which is 29% higher than the<br />
S&P 500 average. By contrast, the $244,135 average paid to directors in the utility sector, which has the<br />
lowest average compensation of all sectors, is 14% lower than the S&P 500 average.<br />
»»<br />
Cash represents a larger share of compensation in industry sectors such as utilities and materials,<br />
48% and 45%, respectively, and a smaller share in the healthcare and information technology sectors,<br />
31% and 33%, respectively.<br />
»»<br />
Stock awards account for 59% of director compensation among information technology companies<br />
and 58% in consumer staples companies, but just 50% of director compensation for materials and<br />
utilities companies.<br />
Average Compensation per Non-employee Director by Industry *<br />
% of total compensation<br />
Industry<br />
Total average<br />
compensation<br />
Cash fees ** Stock awards Option grants All other<br />
compensation ***<br />
Consumer discretionary $257,811 38% 56% 4% 2%<br />
Consumer staples $284,354 36% 58% 4% 2%<br />
Energy $313,712 37% 56% 3% 4%<br />
Financials $258,712 42% 54% 2% 2%<br />
Healthcare $369,080 31% 51% 17% 1%<br />
Industrials $267,205 43% 51% 3% 3%<br />
Information technology $315,618 33% 59% 7% 1%<br />
Materials $266,940 45% 50% 1% 4%<br />
Telecommunication services $276,786 44% 55% 0% 1%<br />
Utilities $244,135 48% 50% 0% 2%<br />
Average $285,065 38% 54% 6% 2%<br />
*<br />
Based on non-employee director compensation tables in 477 proxies for 2016. Includes all board and committee retainers and meeting fees, nonexecutive<br />
chairman and lead/presiding director supplemental fees when applicable, the value of equity compensation and all other compensation<br />
paid to non-employee directors in fiscal year 2015. Retiring and new directors are included when paid compensation for at least three quarters of<br />
the year.<br />
**<br />
Includes deferred compensation amounts.<br />
***<br />
Includes insurance premiums, charitable award programs and incremental cost to the company of products provided to directors.<br />
board index 2016 39
oard organization and process<br />
Southwest sees the largest gain in director compensation<br />
»<br />
» Director compensation for boards in the Southwestern U.S. grew by 5% — the largest regional increase<br />
— bringing average director compensation to $292,608. <strong>Board</strong>s in the Northeast and Southeast regions<br />
each had 1% decreases in average director compensation.<br />
»»<br />
Average director compensation for companies in the West, already the region with the highest director<br />
compensation, rose 1% to $305,832.<br />
»»<br />
Average director compensation in the Midwest region rose 4% to $258,470.<br />
»»<br />
The spread between the highest- and lowest-paying regions has decreased since last year. This year the<br />
difference between the regions with the highest and lowest average director compensation was $48,144,<br />
compared with $51,468 in 2015.<br />
Greatest gain in compensation seen for directors of smaller<br />
S&P 500 companies<br />
»»<br />
Average compensation for directors of companies with revenue less than $2.5 billion grew by 8% to<br />
$282,311, bringing the compensation for these directors higher than the average for directors of<br />
companies in the $2.5-$10 billion revenue range.<br />
»»<br />
Directors of the largest companies, with revenue greater than $10 billion, receive $293,425 in annual<br />
compensation on average, 4% more than the average compensation for directors of companies with<br />
revenue less than $2.5 billion.<br />
Average Director Compensation by Region and by Sales<br />
By region<br />
By sales<br />
West $305,832 Less than $2.5 billion $283,213<br />
Southwest $292,608 $2.5-$10 billion $275,355<br />
Northeast $298,940 Greater than $10 billion $293,425<br />
Northwest $257,688<br />
Southeast $270,417<br />
Midwest $258,470<br />
40<br />
spencer stuart
Comparative <strong>Board</strong> Data<br />
Methodology:<br />
Based on the S&P 500 as of May 15, 2016. Fiscal year 2015 company sales data obtained from Hoovers; industry/sector categories from Capital<br />
IQ. All remaining data were culled from the most recent DEF14A proxy statements released between May 15, 2015 and May 15, 2016. Total average<br />
compensation per non-employee director is based on non-employee director compensation tables included in 477 proxies. Amount includes<br />
all board and committee retainers and meeting fees, supplemental non-executive chairman and lead/presiding director fees, the value of equity<br />
compensation, and all other compensation paid in fiscal year 2015.<br />
board index 2016 41
Comparative <strong>Board</strong> Data<br />
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Consumer Discretionary<br />
Advertising<br />
The Interpublic Group of Companies 7,613.8 10 9 N 64 7 74 11 100,000 b 270,516 39% 55% 0% 6%<br />
Omnicom Group 15,134.4 14 12 Y 70 15 75 7 75,000 b,c 262,325 52% 48% 0% 0%<br />
Apparel Retail<br />
Foot Locker 7,412.0 10 9 Y 65 11 72 5 130,000 b,c,d 262,381 39% 61% 0% 0%<br />
The Gap 15,797.0 10 8 Y 63 12 72 8 75,000 b 265,749 44% 53% 0% 3%<br />
L Brands 11,454.0 11 8 N 71 17 - 7 223,800 d 271,003 52% 48% 0% 0%<br />
Ross Stores 11,041.7 11 7 Y 61 13 - 5 187,500 d 219,187 38% 62% 0% 0%<br />
The TJX Companies 29,078.4 10 8 Y 63 12 75 7 75,000 b 286,959 38% 62% 0% 0%<br />
Urban Outfitters 3,445.1 9 7 N 62 17 - 5 100,000 e 249,200 40% 60% 0% 0%<br />
Apparel, Accessories & Luxury Goods<br />
Coach 4,191.6 8 7 Y 53 6 - 6 75,000 b,c,e 248,977 40% 30% 30% 0%<br />
Hanesbrands 5,731.6 10 9 N 64 7 72 5 95,000 b 242,987 41% 59% 0% 0%<br />
Michael Kors Holdings Limited 4,371.5 8 6 N 63 4 - 5 60,000 b 245,000 39% 61% 0% 0%<br />
PVH Corporation 8,020.3 10 9 N 58 8 72 7 70,000 b 230,777 41% 59% 0% 0%<br />
Ralph Lauren Corporation 7,405.0 11 8 N 72 12 - 4 70,000 b 189,253 47% 26% 27% 0%<br />
Under Armour 3,963.3 10 8 N 63 8 75 13 75,000 b,c 213,611 41% 59% 0% 0%<br />
V.F. Corporation 12,376.7 12 10 N 59 9 72 7 90,000 b,c,e 249,682 39% 29% 30% 2%<br />
Auto Parts & Equipment<br />
BorgWarner 8,023.2 10 9 Y 66 11 72 7 92,000 b 235,503 51% 49% 0% 0%<br />
Delphi Automotive 15,165.0 13 12 Y 64 5 75 12 250,000 c,d 279,083 37% 63% 0% 0%<br />
Johnson Controls 37,179.0 10 9 N 59 9 72 16 265,000 c,d 279,444 48% 52% 0% 0%<br />
Automobile Manufacturers<br />
Ford Motor Company 149,558.0 14 11 Y 65 10 72 8 250,000 c,d,f 295,353 37% 51% 0% 12%<br />
General Motors Company 152,356.0 12 10 N 63 4 72 12 250,000 c,d,f 295,534 27% 69% 0% 4%<br />
Automotive Retail<br />
Advance Auto Parts 9,737.0 12 9 Y 59 8 72 5 85,000 b 232,143 46% 54% 0% 0%<br />
AutoNation 20,862.0 10 9 N 51 7 - 15 50,000 b 366,867 18% 82% 0% 0%<br />
AutoZone 10,187.3 11 10 N 60 9 75 4 200,000 d,g,h 212,653 13% 87% 0% 0%<br />
CarMax 15,149.7 11 10 Y 63 8 76 5 205,000 d 232,950 43% 56% 0% 1%<br />
O'Reilly Automotive 7,966.7 9 5 Y 69 13 78 4 50,000 b 198,532 61% 39% 0% 0%<br />
Broadcasting<br />
CBS Corporation 13,886.0 13 8 N 76 10 - 7 100,000 b,c 332,247 37% 61% 0% 2%<br />
Discovery Communications 6,394.0 10 9 Y 67 9 - 15 90,000 b 258,945 44% 55% 0% 1%<br />
Scripps Networks Interactive 3,018.2 12 11 N 58 6 72 8 50,000 b,c,e 236,445 37% 31% 32% 0%<br />
TEGNA 3,050.9 10 9 Y 60 5 70 10 100,000 b,c 206,302 46% 52% 0% 2%<br />
Cable & Satellite<br />
Comcast Corporation 74,510.0 11 9 N 64 8 72 9 100,000 b,c 311,880 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
Casinos & Gaming<br />
Wynn Resorts Limited 4,075.9 9 7 N 68 8 - 10 60,000 b,e 399,311 37% 62% 0% 1%<br />
Computer & Electronics Retail<br />
Best Buy Co. 39,528.0 10 9 N 57 5 75 7 85,000 b,c 271,353 34% 66% 0% 0%<br />
42<br />
spencer stuart
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Consumer Electronics<br />
Garmin 2,820.3 5 4 Y 66 8 - 4 85,000 b 205,390 39% 61% 0% 0%<br />
Harman International Industries 6,155.3 11 10 N 64 8 75 7 80,000 b 239,822 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
Department Stores<br />
Kohl's Corporation 19,204.0 10 9 N 58 10 72 7 100,000 b 234,967 57% 43% 0% 0%<br />
Macy's 27,079.0 13 12 N 58 8 74 8 70,000 b,c 243,798 38% 57% 0% 5%<br />
Nordstrom 14,437.0 12 9 Y 57 6 72 5 85,000 b,c 255,444 38% 62% 0% 0%<br />
Distributors<br />
Genuine Parts Company 15,280.0 13 10 N 63 7 72 4 60,000 b 258,944 29% 71% 0% 0%<br />
Footwear<br />
NIKE 30,601.0 13 9 Y 60 9 72 5 85,000 b 283,126 32% 61% 0% 7%<br />
General Merchandise Stores<br />
Dollar General Corporation 20,368.6 8 7 Y 59 6 76 10 85,000 b 224,055 44% 55% 0% 1%<br />
Dollar Tree 15,498.4 11 9 Y 68 12 - 6 180,000 c,i 206,111 100% 0% 0% 0%<br />
Target Corporation 73,785.0 14 13 N 59 7 72 7 260,000 c,d 282,105 33% 67% 0% 0%<br />
Home Furnishing Retail<br />
Bed Bath & Beyond 12,103.9 10 7 Y 64 13 - 11 100,000 b,c 201,071 55% 45% 0% 0%<br />
Home Furnishings<br />
Leggett & Platt 3,917.2 9 7 Y 66 14 72 4 195,000 c,d 247,687 31% 61% 0% 8%<br />
Mohawk Industries 8,071.6 9 7 N 63 8 75 5 80,000 b,c 177,877 49% 51% 0% 0%<br />
Home Improvement Retail<br />
The Home Depot 88,519.0 12 11 N 58 6 72 7 280,000 c,d,f 299,545 21% 77% 0% 2%<br />
Lowe's Companies 59,074.0 11 10 N 62 5 72 5 80,000 b,c 241,456 36% 64% 0% 0%<br />
The Sherwin-Williams Company 11,339.3 11 9 Y 61 7 72 6 110,000 b,c 262,056 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
Homebuilding<br />
D.R. Horton 10,824.0 5 4 Y 64 11 75 8 - b 199,404 39% 61% 0% 0%<br />
Lennar Corporation 9,474.0 9 8 Y 67 13 - 5 90,000 b,d,e 253,617 34% 59% 6% 1%<br />
PulteGroup 5,982.0 10 9 N 60 8 75 6 235,000 d 251,139 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
Hotels, Resorts & Cruise Lines<br />
Carnival Corporation 15,714.0 9 7 Y 65 11 75 6 110,000 b 295,068 45% 54% 0% 1%<br />
Marriott International 14,486.0 11 8 Y 63 8 72 7 75,000 b,c 238,329 39% 59% 0% 2%<br />
Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. 8,299.0 12 10 N 63 9 - 7 80,000 b 232,247 46% 51% 0% 3%<br />
Wyndham Worldwide Corporation 5,536.0 7 6 N 66 15 75 5 210,000 b,c,d 478,586 28% 49% 0% 23%<br />
Household Appliances<br />
Whirlpool Corporation 20,891.0 11 9 N 61 8 72 7 125,000 b 258,806 52% 48% 0% 0%<br />
Internet Retail<br />
Amazon.com 107,006.0 10 9 N 66 10 - 4 265,000 d,g 265,000 0% 100% 0% 0%<br />
NetFlix 6,779.5 9 8 N 57 9 - 5 - e,g,j 266,364 0% 0% 100% 0%<br />
The Priceline Group 9,224.0 10 9 N 60 8 - 8 50,000 b 345,055 22% 78% 0% 0%<br />
TripAdvisor 1,492.0 8 6 Y 47 4 - 8 50,000 b,c 67,857 100% 0% 0% 0%<br />
Leisure Products<br />
Hasbro 4,447.5 12 11 N 61 11 72 8 95,000 b,c 324,931 20% 61% 0% 19%<br />
Mattel 5,702.6 10 9 N 60 8 73 8 100,000 b 272,744 44% 48% 0% 8%<br />
Motorcycle Manufacturers<br />
Harley-Davidson 5,995.4 9 7 Y 62 12 75 5 100,000 b,c 247,000 49% 51% 0% 0%<br />
board index 2016 43
Comparative <strong>Board</strong> Data<br />
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Movies & Entertainment<br />
Time Warner 28,118.0 11 10 N 65 10 75 7 145,000 b,c,e 289,996 43% 34% 23% 0%<br />
Twenty-First Century Fox 28,987.0 13 8 Y 55 6 - 6 270,000 d,f 294,714 42% 58% 0% 0%<br />
Viacom 13,268.0 11 6 Y 61 11 - 6 100,000 b,c 313,648 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
The Walt Disney Company 52,465.0 11 9 N 61 9 - 6 105,000 b,c 324,868 40% 55% 0% 5%<br />
Publishing<br />
News Corporation 8,633.0 12 7 Y 52 3 - 9 225,000 d,f 241,278 48% 52% 0% 0%<br />
Restaurants<br />
Chipotle Mexican Grill 4,501.2 9 7 N 62 13 - 5 195,000 d 221,217 47% 53% 0% 0%<br />
Darden Restaurants 6,764.0 12 11 Y 56 2 73 19 75,000 b,c,i 210,277 29% 54% 17% 0%<br />
McDonald's Corporation 25,413.0 12 11 Y 62 10 - 10 100,000 b,c 244,214 45% 51% 0% 4%<br />
Starbucks Corporation 19,162.7 12 10 N 60 11 75 7 240,000 c,i 205,424 6% 63% 31% 0%<br />
Yum! Brands 13,105.0 12 11 Y 58 6 72 10 240,000 b,d,e,g,h n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a<br />
Specialized Consumer Services<br />
H&R Block 3,078.7 10 9 Y 62 7 - 8 190,000 d,f 250,609 35% 63% 0% 2%<br />
Specialty Stores<br />
Signet Jewelers Limited 6,550.2 10 9 Y 66 7 75 7 245,000 d 293,507 46% 54% 0% 0%<br />
Staples 21,059.0 11 10 N 58 6 72 14 75,000 b 292,962 25% 75% 0% 0%<br />
Tiffany & Co. 4,104.9 10 7 Y 69 14 74 6 80,000 b,e 159,099 0% 50% 50% 0%<br />
Tractor Supply Co. 6,226.5 8 7 Y 63 7 72 5 75,000 b 214,815 49% 51% 0% 0%<br />
ULTA Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance 3,924.1 11 10 Y 62 7 - 6 200,000 d 215,951 49% 51% 0% 0%<br />
Tires & Rubber<br />
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company 16,443.0 13 11 N 63 6 72 8 121,250 b,c 257,779 52% 48% 0% 0%<br />
TOTAL CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY<br />
Average 10.5 8.7 62.0 8.8 73.3 7.4 128,007 257,811 38% 56% 4% 2%<br />
Median 10.5 9.0 62.3 8.4 72.0 7.0 100,000 250,609<br />
CONSUMER STAPLES<br />
Agricultural Products<br />
Archer-Daniels-Midland Company 67,702.0 12 11 N 60 8 75 8 275,000 c,d 272,455 32% 67% 0% 1%<br />
Brewers<br />
Molson Coors Brewing Company 3,567.5 14 9 Y 60 6 70 9 100,000 b,c 271,079 40% 46% 0% 14%<br />
Distillers & Vintners<br />
Brown-Forman Corporation 4,011.0 13 6 Y 61 6 71 7 175,000 c,d,f 218,072 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
Constellation Brands 7,223.8 9 7 Y 60 12 70 5 70,000 b,e 221,404 45% 32% 23% 0%<br />
Drug Retail<br />
CVS Health Corporation 153,290.0 11 10 Y 64 6 74 8 280,000 c,d 329,208 25% 74% 0% 1%<br />
Walgreens Boots Alliance 103,444.0 11 8 Y 60 6 75 9 95,000 b,c 305,997 33% 57% 0% 10%<br />
Food Distributors<br />
Sysco Corporation 48,680.8 12 10 Y 67 10 - 14 100,000 b,c 354,849 46% 52% 0% 2%<br />
Food Retail<br />
The Kroger Co. 109,830.0 11 10 N 63 11 72 5 85,000 b 265,317 38% 62% 0% 0%<br />
Whole Foods Market 15,389.0 11 9 Y 63 12 - 7 39,780 b,e 351,047 25% 34% 40% 1%<br />
44<br />
spencer stuart
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Household Products<br />
Church & Dwight Co. 3,394.8 10 8 Y 59 9 72 6 100,000 d,e,g,h 226,750 9% 38% 53% 0%<br />
The Clorox Company 5,655.0 11 10 Y 64 7 72 7 100,000 b,c 235,835 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
Colgate-Palmolive Company 16,034.0 10 9 N 62 9 72 9 55,000 b,c,e,h 280,337 25% 58% 16% 1%<br />
Kimberly-Clark Corporation 18,591.0 11 10 N 65 12 72 6 100,000 b 275,100 35% 63% 0% 2%<br />
The Procter & Gamble Company 76,279.0 13 11 Y 62 7 72 8 110,000 b,c 295,500 41% 59% 0% 0%<br />
Hypermarkets & Super Centers<br />
Costco Wholesale Corporation 116,199.0 13 7 Y 68 12 - 5 30,000 b 343,577 11% 89% 0% 0%<br />
Wal-Mart Stores 482,130.0 12 8 Y 56 5 75 6 90,000 b,c 297,804 38% 61% 0% 1%<br />
Packaged Foods & Meats<br />
Campbell Soup Company 8,082.0 12 11 Y 64 13 72 7 231,000 c,d 275,423 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
ConAgra Foods 15,832.4 12 11 Y 64 8 72 9 90,000 b 264,393 34% 63% 0% 3%<br />
General Mills 17,630.3 11 10 N 65 11 74 7 75,000 b,c 290,129 27% 62% 0% 11%<br />
The Hershey Company 7,386.6 11 10 N 64 7 72 10 100,000 b,c 241,111 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
Hormel Foods Corporation 9,263.9 15 12 N 60 7 72 8 70,000 b,c 250,827 34% 64% 0% 2%<br />
The J.M. Smucker Company 7,811.2 13 8 Y 63 11 72 11 85,000 b 212,833 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
Kellogg Company 13,525.0 12 10 N 60 6 72 10 250,000 c,d 265,921 42% 58% 0% 0%<br />
The Kraft Heinz Company 18,338.0 10 9 Y 62 2 - 6 110,000 b n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a<br />
McCormick & Company 4,296.3 11 8 Y 60 9 72 10 90,000 b,e 262,278 38% 38% 24% 0%<br />
Mead Johnson Nutrition Company 4,071.3 13 10 Y 63 6 75 11 50,000 b 315,359 40% 60% 0% 0%<br />
Mondelez International 29,636.0 13 12 N 65 5 75 8 110,000 b 279,716 43% 57% 0% 0%<br />
Tyson Foods 41,373.0 9 7 Y 61 8 72 6 100,000 b,c 283,229 47% 53% 0% 0%<br />
Personal Products<br />
The Estee Lauder Companies 10,780.4 15 9 Y 61 11 - 6 150,000 b,d,e 265,181 35% 27% 38% 0%<br />
Soft Drinks<br />
The Coca-Cola Company 44,294.0 15 13 N 65 8 74 6 250,000 c,d,f 265,985 22% 75% 0% 3%<br />
Coca-Cola Enterprises 7,011.0 11 10 N 62 9 72 13 230,000 d 243,233 50% 49% 0% 1%<br />
Dr Pepper Snapple Group 6,282.0 8 7 Y 62 6 70 6 100,000 b,c 249,375 40% 60% 0% 0%<br />
Monster Beverage Corporation 2,722.6 10 6 N 69 18 - 7 205,000 d,e 223,469 35% 65% 0% 0%<br />
PepsiCo 63,056.0 14 13 N 61 5 72 7 275,000 c,d 320,707 35% 64% 0% 1%<br />
Tobacco<br />
Altria Group 25,434.0 11 10 N 66 8 75 9 100,000 b,c 315,817 39% 55% 0% 6%<br />
Phillip Morris International 73,908.0 12 9 Y 66 5 - 6 125,000 b,c 345,935 48% 52% 0% 0%<br />
Reynolds American 10,675.0 13 9 Y 63 8 72 12 60,000 b,c 497,065 31% 69% 0% 0%<br />
TOTAL CONSUMER STAPLES<br />
Average 11.8 9.4 62.6 8.2 72.6 7.9 125,967 284,354 36% 58% 4% 2%<br />
Median 12.0 10.0 62.7 7.6 72.0 7.0 100,000 273,777<br />
ENERGY<br />
Integrated Oil & Gas<br />
Chevron Corporation 129,925.0 11 10 N 63 6 72 6 150,000 b,c,i 399,678 33% 58% 7% 2%<br />
Exxon Mobil Corporation 259,488.0 14 12 N 65 7 72 11 110,000 b 344,415 33% 67% 0% 0%<br />
Occidental Petroleum Corporation 12,480.0 11 9 Y 65 7 75 6 125,000 b 428,990 30% 60% 0% 10%<br />
board index 2016 45
Comparative <strong>Board</strong> Data<br />
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Oil & Gas Drilling<br />
Diamond Offshore Drilling 2,419.0 11 6 Y 71 11 - 7 50,000 e 149,190 42% 0% 58% 0%<br />
Helmerich & Payne 3,165.4 10 8 Y 67 14 - 4 80,000 c,e 236,607 37% 0% 63% 0%<br />
Transocean Ltd. 7,386.0 11 10 Y 60 6 72 7 100,000 b 385,112 33% 62% 0% 5%<br />
Oil & Gas Equipment & Services<br />
Baker Hughes 15,742.0 13 12 N 68 11 74 9 100,000 b,i 292,423 40% 59% 0% 1%<br />
FMC Technologies 6,362.7 12 11 N 65 8 73 9 60,000 b,c 342,363 20% 79% 0% 1%<br />
Halliburton Company 23,633.0 12 10 N 64 9 72 6 115,000 b,c 413,134 30% 43% 0% 27%<br />
National Oilwell Varco 14,757.0 9 8 N 63 9 72 6 75,000 b,e 283,668 38% 62% 0% 0%<br />
Schlumberger Limited 35,475.0 10 9 N 63 7 70 5 100,000 b 332,595 36% 64% 0% 0%<br />
Oil & Gas Exploration & Production<br />
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation 9,486.0 11 10 N 59 7 72 7 110,000 b,c 375,674 33% 66% 0% 1%<br />
Apache Corporation 6,383.0 11 10 Y 60 7 75 16 300,000 c,d,f 316,021 35% 64% 0% 1%<br />
Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation 1,357.2 6 5 N 64 5 73 6 75,000 b 297,183 30% 67% 0% 3%<br />
Chesapeake Energy Corporation 12,764.0 9 8 Y 62 4 80 15 100,000 b,c 390,017 26% 74% 0% 0%<br />
Cimarex Energy Co. 1,452.6 10 8 N 70 10 - 5 255,000 d 290,146 37% 62% 0% 1%<br />
Concho Resources 18,035.6 8 5 N 64 6 - 9 50,000 b 289,124 34% 66% 0% 0%<br />
ConocoPhillips 29,564.0 11 10 N 62 6 72 5 115,000 b,c 360,082 37% 61% 0% 2%<br />
Devon Energy Corporation 13,145.0 9 7 Y 64 7 73 7 70,000 b 344,206 33% 67% 0% 0%<br />
EOG Resources 8,757.0 7 6 N 71 12 80 8 140,000 b 344,796 41% 41% 0% 18%<br />
EQT Corporation 1,954.0 10 9 N 65 11 74 6 60,000 b,c 322,529 28% 55% 0% 17%<br />
Hess Corporation 6,636.0 11 10 Y 65 6 75 8 110,000 b 323,449 46% 54% 0% 0%<br />
Marathon Oil Corporation 5,596.0 8 7 Y 63 7 72 8 150,000 b 359,124 50% 49% 0% 1%<br />
Murphy Oil Corporation 2,787.1 12 10 Y 63 11 72 6 60,000 b 314,314 34% 64% 0% 2%<br />
Newfield Exploration Company 1,557.0 9 8 N 62 8 72 5 75,000 b 291,194 31% 69% 0% 0%<br />
Noble Energy 3,133.0 11 10 N 64 12 75 17 75,000 b,e 289,773 45% 28% 27% 0%<br />
Pioneer Natural Resources Company 3,142.0 13 11 N 61 5 - 11 275,000 d 264,715 19% 80% 0% 1%<br />
Range Resources Corporation 1,181.7 9 8 N 63 9 - 10 50,000 b,c 321,971 22% 78% 0% 0%<br />
Southwestern Energy Company 3,133.0 8 7 Y 62 7 75 7 50,000 b,e 239,303 39% 40% 20% 1%<br />
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing<br />
Marathon Petroleum Corporation 72,051.0 10 8 N 64 4 72 13 150,000 b 364,417 53% 46% 0% 1%<br />
Phillips 66 98,975.0 8 7 N 65 4 75 8 125,000 b,c 321,361 43% 53% 0% 4%<br />
Tesoro Corporation 28,711.0 10 9 N 67 7 75 11 270,000 c,d 309,557 45% 49% 0% 6%<br />
Valero Energy Corporation 87,804.0 9 8 N 64 8 75 6 120,000 b 302,409 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
Oil & Gas Storage & Transportation<br />
Kinder Morgan 14,403.0 15 12 Y 70 4 - 9 200,000 c 200,734 85% 15% 0% 0%<br />
ONEOK 7,763.2 11 9 Y 62 8 73 17 200,000 c,d 204,950 30% 66% 0% 4%<br />
Spectra Energy Corporation 5,234.0 11 10 N 65 7 74 12 225,000 d 238,511 48% 52% 0% 0%<br />
TOTAL ENERGY<br />
Average 10.3 8.8 64.3 7.7 73.7 8.6 124,306 313,712 37% 56% 3% 4%<br />
Median 10.5 9.0 64.2 7.0 73.0 7.5 110,000 318,691<br />
46<br />
spencer stuart
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
FINANCIALS<br />
Asset Management & Custody Banks<br />
Affiliated Managers Group 2,484.5 8 7 N 54 6 - 6 80,000 b,e 323,077 38% 25% 37% 0%<br />
Ameriprise Financial 12,170.0 8 7 N 65 8 75 6 205,000 c,d 280,627 38% 45% 0% 17%<br />
The Bank of New York Mellon<br />
Corporation 15,494.0 11 10 N 64 12 75 17 110,000 b,c 286,122 53% 45% 0% 2%<br />
BlackRock 11,401.0 19 16 N 65 6 75 7 75,000 b,c,d 266,400 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
Franklin Resources 7,948.7 10 7 N 60 5 75 6 85,000 b,c 217,938 34% 66% 0% 0%<br />
Invesco 5,122.9 7 6 Y 67 8 75 13 120,000 b 310,459 53% 47% 0% 0%<br />
Legg Mason 2,660.8 11 10 N 66 7 75 8 50,000 b,h 243,980 41% 58% 0% 1%<br />
Northern Trust Corporation 4,856.5 12 11 N 59 8 72 9 220,000 c,d 232,267 52% 47% 0% 1%<br />
State Street Corporation 10,760.0 11 10 N 63 10 75 8 75,000 b,c 314,300 35% 60% 0% 5%<br />
T. Rowe Price Group 4,200.6 12 9 Y 64 6 72 7 100,000 b,c,e,k 354,106 35% 53% 9% 3%<br />
Consumer Finance<br />
American Express Company 34,441.0 13 12 N 63 7 72 10 95,000 b,c 310,508 41% 53% 0% 6%<br />
Capital One Financial Corporation 25,038.0 11 10 N 62 9 72 13 90,000 b 336,417 45% 51% 0% 4%<br />
Discover Financial Services 10,002.0 12 11 N 62 7 - 15 90,000 b 249,386 48% 52% 0% 0%<br />
Navient Corporation 5,197.0 12 11 Y 62 9 75 10 100,000 b 237,036 56% 44% 0% 0%<br />
Synchrony Financial 13,620.0 9 8 Y 61 1 75 14 160,000 d 271,424 59% 41% 0% 0%<br />
Diversified Banks<br />
Bank of America Corporation 93,056.0 13 12 N 65 5 72 21 100,000 b,c 329,732 35% 62% 0% 3%<br />
Citigroup 88,275.0 16 14 Y 63 5 72 20 75,000 b,c 362,250 59% 41% 0% 0%<br />
Comerica 2,834.0 9 8 N 59 12 72 8 50,000 b,c 178,328 52% 48% 0% 0%<br />
JPMorgan Chase & Co. 101,006.0 11 10 N 65 9 72 11 75,000 b,c 353,000 28% 64% 0% 8%<br />
U.S. Bancorp 21,494.0 14 13 N 60 9 72 8 90,000 b,c 258,845 46% 54% 0% 0%<br />
Wells Fargo & Company 90,033.0 15 14 N 65 10 72 9 75,000 b,c 340,772 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
Healthcare REITs<br />
HCP 2,544.3 8 7 Y 68 14 - 15 75,000 d,e 236,440 49% 51% 0% 0%<br />
Ventas 3,283.9 9 8 N 61 7 75 8 90,000 d,e 236,742 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
Welltower 3,859.8 10 9 Y 65 9 75 4 75,000 d 228,776 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
Hotel & Resort REITs<br />
Host Hotels & Resorts 5,387.0 9 7 Y 64 11 - 5 200,000 c,d 251,630 34% 46% 0% 20%<br />
Industrial REITs<br />
ProLogis 2,197.1 10 9 N 64 11 72 7 100,000 b 270,537 41% 55% 0% 4%<br />
Insurance Brokers<br />
Aon plc 11,682.0 11 10 Y 67 12 - 7 120,000 b,c 334,358 38% 53% 0% 9%<br />
Marsh & McLennan Companies 12,893.0 11 10 Y 64 7 75 9 110,000 b,c 272,743 49% 51% 0% 0%<br />
Willis Towers Watson Public<br />
Limited Company 3,829.0 12 10 Y 62 8 - 11 230,000 d 251,651 48% 47% 0% 5%<br />
Investment Banking & Brokerage<br />
The Charles Schwab Corporation 6,380.0 15 13 Y 68 13 - 7 100,000 b,c,e,i 293,532 48% 28% 23% 1%<br />
E*TRADE Financial Corporation 1,557.0 11 10 Y 66 5 - 13 50,000 b 249,824 51% 49% 0% 0%<br />
The Goldman Sachs Group 39,208.0 13 10 N 62 6 75 14 75,000 b,d,g,h 607,633 5% 90% 0% 5%<br />
Morgan Stanley 37,897.0 14 13 N 63 5 72 16 75,000 b,c 351,072 28% 71% 0% 1%<br />
board index 2016 47
Comparative <strong>Board</strong> Data<br />
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Life & Health Insurance<br />
AFLAC 20,872.0 13 8 N 67 13 75 4 115,000 b,c,e,i,k 268,458 48% 47% 5% 0%<br />
Lincoln National Corporation 13,572.0 10 9 Y 69 13 75 4 247,000 c,d,f 283,675 32% 64% 0% 4%<br />
MetLife 69,951.0 12 11 N 63 7 72 8 300,000 d 281,408 52% 47% 0% 1%<br />
Principal Financial Group 11,964.4 10 9 N 63 11 72 10 225,000 c,d 262,001 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
Prudential Financial 57,119.0 13 11 N 62 7 74 10 300,000 c,d 322,963 54% 46% 0% 0%<br />
Torchmark Corporation 3,766.1 11 9 N 66 12 74 4 210,000 c,d,i 223,792 42% 36% 22% 0%<br />
Unum Group 10,731.3 13 11 Y 61 6 72 9 110,000 b,c 253,452 43% 56% 0% 1%<br />
Multi-line Insurance<br />
American International Group 58,327.0 16 15 Y 63 5 75 14 280,000 c,d,f 317,805 59% 41% 0% 0%<br />
Assurant 10,325.5 10 9 Y 65 8 75 10 100,000 b,c 222,251 55% 45% 0% 0%<br />
The Hartford Financial Services Group 18,377.0 11 10 N 62 8 75 7 100,000 b,c 280,880 23% 76% 0% 1%<br />
Loews Corporation 13,415.0 14 11 Y 69 11 - 9 100,000 b 177,132 65% 0% 35% 0%<br />
Multi-sector Holdings<br />
Berkshire Hathaway 210,821.0 12 8 N 68 12 - 3 - - 4,170 100% 0% 0% 0%<br />
Leucadia National Corporation 10,886.5 11 8 Y 66 4 - 7 115,000 b 240,000 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
Office REITs<br />
Boston Properties 2,490.8 11 9 Y 67 9 75 7 67,500 b,c 202,595 43% 57% 0% 0%<br />
SL Green Realty Corporation 1,662.8 8 5 Y 69 13 - 4 50,000 b,c 381,300 25% 75% 0% 0%<br />
Vornado Realty Trust 2,502.3 9 7 N 75 21 - 7 75,000 b 193,910 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
Property & Casualty Insurance<br />
The Allstate Corporation 35,653.0 10 9 N 62 6 72 9 105,000 b,c 267,393 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
Chubb Limited 18,987.0 17 16 N 65 10 75 8 260,000 d 383,198 37% 54% 0% 9%<br />
Cincinnati Financial Corporation 5,142.0 15 10 Y 60 12 73 4 80,000 d 187,382 51% 46% 0% 3%<br />
The Progressive Corporation 20,853.8 9 8 N 62 9 80 8 250,000 d,g,h 270,566 0% 100% 0% 0%<br />
The Travelers Companies 26,800.0 14 12 Y 66 11 74 5 125,000 b,c 302,913 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
XL Group 9,308.9 13 11 Y 68 7 - 7 105,000 b,c 288,528 48% 52% 0% 0%<br />
Real Estate Services<br />
CBRE Group 10,855.8 10 9 Y 62 7 - 5 75,000 b,c 235,350 36% 64% 0% 0%<br />
Regional Banks<br />
BB&T Corporation 10,346.0 18 16 N 65 5 72 10 60,000 b 196,512 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
Citizens Financial Group 5,276.0 12 11 N 66 6 75 11 175,000 d 179,027 49% 50% 0% 1%<br />
Fifth Third Bancorp 7,031.0 11 10 Y 61 6 70 13 50,000 b 289,696 56% 40% 0% 4%<br />
Huntington Bancshares 3,153.3 11 9 N 62 8 - 15 35,000 b,c 221,725 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
KeyCorp 4,502.0 14 13 N 60 6 72 11 70,000 b,c 181,500 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
M&T Bank Corporation 5,010.1 16 12 N 72 16 - 12 85,000 c 169,040 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
People's United Financial 1,378.7 12 9 Y 68 13 76 12 24,000 b,c 181,294 47% 53% 0% 0%<br />
The PNC Financial Services Group 16,270.0 13 12 N 63 8 72 10 67,500 b,c 312,790 37% 44% 0% 19%<br />
Regions Financial Corporation 5,674.0 11 10 N 65 9 72 9 165,000 c,d 214,682 51% 49% 0% 0%<br />
SunTrust Banks 8,533.0 11 10 N 62 5 72 6 70,000 b 231,659 46% 52% 0% 2%<br />
Zions Bancorporation 2,210.6 11 9 N 63 12 72 13 40,000 b,c 157,152 52% 48% 0% 0%<br />
Residential REITs<br />
Apartment Investment and<br />
Management Company 981.3 8 7 N 66 11 - 5 25,000 b 209,217 12% 88% 0% 0%<br />
AvalonBay Communities 1,856.0 9 8 N 63 7 72 5 70,000 b,c 207,585 23% 77% 0% 0%<br />
48<br />
spencer stuart
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Residential REITs (continued)<br />
Equity Residential 2,745.0 13 11 Y 61 11 72 7 180,000 d,e,i 207,777 40% 57% 3% 0%<br />
Essex Property Trust 1,194.4 9 7 Y 67 11 - 6 30,000 e,k 102,545 43% 14% 43% 0%<br />
UDR 894.6 10 9 Y 67 10 - 8 80,000 b,c 207,557 34% 64% 0% 2%<br />
Retail REITs<br />
Federal Realty Investment Trust 744.0 7 6 Y 62 13 72 5 175,000 d 195,329 42% 57% 0% 1%<br />
General Growth Properties 2,403.9 9 8 Y 56 5 - 8 200,000 c,d 180,002 40% 60% 0% 0%<br />
Kimco Realty Corporation 1,166.8 8 6 Y 74 16 - 5 60,000 b,c 288,599 39% 61% 0% 0%<br />
The Macerich Co. 1,288.1 10 7 N 62 7 75 12 60,000 b,c 207,906 47% 53% 0% 0%<br />
Realty Income Corporation 1,023.3 8 7 Y 63 10 - 17 15,000 b 235,516 20% 80% 0% 0%<br />
Simon Property Group 5,266.1 11 8 N 66 8 - 8 100,000 b 273,624 42% 58% 0% 0%<br />
Specialized Finance<br />
Intercontinental Exchange 3,338.0 8 7 N 64 11 75 9 85,000 b,c 356,845 31% 53% 0% 16%<br />
Moody's Corporation 3,484.5 9 8 Y 64 8 - 11 90,000 b 267,464 39% 60% 0% 1%<br />
Nasdaq 3,403.0 10 9 Y 58 6 - 20 80,000 b,c 262,200 37% 63% 0% 0%<br />
S&P Global 5,313.0 10 9 Y 66 9 72 9 70,000 b 232,596 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
Specialized REITs<br />
American Tower Corporation 4,771.5 10 9 N 64 9 - 11 85,000 b 251,203 36% 32% 32% 0%<br />
Crown Castle International Corp. 3,663.9 12 10 Y 64 12 - 8 75,000 b 214,489 38% 62% 0% 0%<br />
Equinix 2,725.9 10 8 Y 61 7 75 18 60,000 b 339,259 26% 74% 0% 0%<br />
Extra Space Storage 782.3 7 4 Y 67 7 - 7 65,000 b 169,063 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
Public Storage 2,381.7 8 5 N 65 12 70 5 120,000 e 206,507 66% 34% 0% 0%<br />
Weyerhaeuser Company 7,082.0 13 11 Y 61 10 72 6 220,000 c,d 244,791 48% 52% 0% 0%<br />
TOTAL FINANCIALS<br />
Average 11.2 9.6 64.0 8.9 73.5 9.3 110,356 258,712 42% 54% 2% 2%<br />
Median 11.0 9.0 63.7 8.5 73.0 8.0 90,000 262,200<br />
HEALTHCARE<br />
Biotechnology<br />
AbbVie 22,859.0 9 8 N 61 3 75 10 126,000 b,c,i 294,290 46% 49% 0% 5%<br />
Alexion Pharmaceuticals 2,604.0 11 9 Y 64 6 - 5 95,000 b,e 343,554 34% 32% 34% 0%<br />
Amgen 21,622.0 13 12 N 66 8 72 6 100,000 b 332,314 40% 60% 0% 0%<br />
Biogen Idec 10,763.8 11 10 Y 61 10 75 16 65,000 b 438,862 33% 65% 0% 2%<br />
Celgene Corporation 9,256.0 12 9 Y 67 8 - 8 75,000 b,e 574,365 19% 20% 61% 0%<br />
Gilead Sciences 32,639.0 9 7 Y 70 10 - 5 75,000 b,c,e 422,148 28% 36% 36% 0%<br />
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals 4,103.7 10 7 Y 68 18 - 7 55,000 e 2,061,048 4% 0% 96% 0%<br />
Vertex Pharmaceuticals 1,032.3 9 8 N 59 10 - 7 85,000 b,e 1,320,797 5% 95% 0% 0%<br />
Health Care Technology<br />
Cerner Corporation 4,425.3 9 7 N 70 11 75 4 66,000 b 337,035 25% 75% 0% 0%<br />
Healthcare Distributors<br />
AmerisourceBergen Corporation 135,961.8 10 8 N 62 7 75 4 100,000 b,c 243,750 46% 54% 0% 0%<br />
Cardinal Health 102,531.0 11 10 N 63 6 75 10 100,000 b 260,773 37% 63% 0% 0%<br />
Henry Schein 10,629.7 15 10 N 69 8 80 7 50,000 b 260,650 29% 71% 0% 0%<br />
McKesson Corporation 190,884.0 11 10 N 66 10 75 7 75,000 b 270,827 42% 58% 0% 0%<br />
board index 2016 49
Comparative <strong>Board</strong> Data<br />
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Healthcare Distributors (continued)<br />
Patterson Companies 4,375.0 8 7 N 60 8 75 14 90,000 b 171,468 40% 60% 0% 0%<br />
Healthcare Equipment<br />
Abbott Laboratories 20,405.0 11 10 N 64 8 75 6 126,000 b 282,404 47% 48% 0% 5%<br />
Baxter International 9,968.0 12 11 N 65 9 72 12 65,000 b,e 317,912 42% 36% 17% 5%<br />
Becton, Dickinson and Company 10,282.0 12 11 N 65 10 72 6 92,000 b,c 288,927 33% 66% 0% 1%<br />
Boston Scientific Corporation 7,477.0 10 9 N 57 3 - 5 90,000 b,c,i 292,455 35% 57% 6% 2%<br />
C.R. Bard 3,416.0 12 10 N 66 11 74 6 62,500 b,c 279,313 34% 36% 0% 30%<br />
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation 2,493.7 8 7 N 65 4 75 8 40,000 b,c,e,i 291,919 14% 75% 11% 0%<br />
Hologic 2,705.0 10 9 N 58 6 72 6 60,000 b,e 257,900 30% 35% 35% 0%<br />
Intuitive Surgical 2,384.4 9 7 Y 63 7 - 5 60,000 b,e 425,083 17% 60% 23% 0%<br />
Medtronic 20,261.0 13 12 N 61 8 72 13 175,000 b 236,219 52% 48% 0% 0%<br />
St. Jude Medical 5,541.0 10 8 Y 62 10 75 7 100,000 b,c 271,004 37% 63% 0% 0%<br />
Stryker Corporation 9,946.0 9 8 N 60 16 - 9 60,000 b,e 304,265 44% 29% 27% 0%<br />
Varian Medical Systems 3,099.1 10 8 Y 61 8 75 8 100,000 b,c 297,007 46% 54% 0% 0%<br />
Zimmer Biomet Holdings 5,997.8 12 11 Y 58 6 72 5 95,000 b,c,d,f 308,686 31% 67% 0% 2%<br />
Healthcare Facilities<br />
HCA Holdings 39,678.0 12 8 N 65 3 75 6 100,000 b 302,906 42% 58% 0% 0%<br />
Universal Health Services 9,043.5 7 4 N 61 14 - 6 40,000 e 375,655 15% 0% 85% 0%<br />
Healthcare Services<br />
DaVita Healthcare Partners 13,781.8 10 9 N 63 11 75 9 80,000 b,e 315,042 47% 30% 23% 0%<br />
Express Scripts Holding Co. 101,751.8 12 10 Y 63 9 75 7 100,000 b,e 287,450 30% 35% 35% 0%<br />
Laboratory Corporation of<br />
America Holdings 8,505.7 10 9 N 58 8 75 6 100,000 b 253,672 41% 59% 0% 0%<br />
Quest Diagnostics 7,493.0 10 9 Y 65 10 - 9 96,500 b,c,i 270,515 35% 65% 0% 0%<br />
Healthcare Supplies<br />
DENTSPLY Sirona 2,674.3 11 9 Y 65 12 75 9 70,000 b,c,e 234,889 36% 32% 32% 0%<br />
Life Sciences Tools & Services<br />
Agilent Technologies 4,038.0 10 9 Y 66 9 75 12 90,000 b,c 298,842 39% 61% 0% 0%<br />
Illumina 2,219.8 8 6 N 62 8 - 8 55,000 b,c 484,271 17% 83% 0% 0%<br />
PerkinElmer 2,262.4 8 7 N 64 11 72 7 90,000 b 264,310 34% 60% 6% 0%<br />
Thermo Fisher Scientific 16,965.4 10 8 Y 62 8 72 13 100,000 b,c 293,300 44% 51% 0% 5%<br />
Waters Corporation 2,042.3 10 8 Y 62 18 72 7 55,000 b,c,e 335,729 27% 41% 32% 0%<br />
Managed Healthcare<br />
Aetna 60,336.5 12 11 N 68 12 76 17 95,000 b,c 311,359 34% 51% 0% 15%<br />
Anthem 79,156.5 9 8 N 65 8 72 23 95,000 b 347,224 45% 50% 0% 5%<br />
Centene Corporation 22,760.0 8 7 N 69 12 - 17 125,000 b,c,e 361,574 5% 90% 0% 5%<br />
CIGNA Corporation 37,876.0 11 10 Y 62 9 72 25 275,000 c,d 319,408 43% 56% 0% 1%<br />
Humana 54,289.0 10 9 Y 59 11 73 21 105,000 b,c 312,907 43% 50% 0% 7%<br />
UnitedHealth Group 157,107.0 10 8 Y 70 15 - 10 125,000 b,c 345,628 50% 45% 0% 5%<br />
Pharmaceuticals<br />
Allergan plc 15,071.0 12 10 Y 64 7 - 15 125,000 b 455,062 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
Bristol-Myers Squibb Company 16,560.0 11 9 Y 62 7 75 7 90,000 b,c 302,451 41% 53% 0% 6%<br />
Eli Lilly & Company 19,958.7 14 13 N 62 10 72 9 110,000 b,c 283,467 45% 52% 0% 3%<br />
Endo International plc 3,268.7 9 8 Y 63 8 - 9 140,000 b,c 525,714 43% 57% 0% 0%<br />
50<br />
spencer stuart
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Pharmaceuticals (continued)<br />
Johnson & Johnson 70,074.0 11 10 N 64 6 72 10 110,000 b 292,914 42% 53% 0% 5%<br />
Mallinckrodt Public Limited Company 3,346.9 11 10 Y 63 3 72 9 100,000 b 353,150 33% 67% 0% 0%<br />
Merck & Co. 39,498.0 13 12 N 63 9 72 8 110,000 b,c 273,490 41% 59% 0% 0%<br />
Perrigo Company Public<br />
Limited Company 4,603.9 10 8 N 63 13 72 11 75,000 b 431,243 30% 70% 0% 0%<br />
Pfizer 48,851.0 11 10 N 64 7 73 13 137,500 b,c 333,733 47% 49% 0% 4%<br />
Zoetis 4,765.0 11 9 Y 63 2 - 14 270,000 d,f 283,889 40% 60% 0% 0%<br />
TOTAL HEALTHCARE<br />
Average 10.5 8.9 63.5 8.9 73.8 9.5 97,209 369,080 31% 51% 17% 1%<br />
Median 10.0 9.0 63.2 8.4 75.0 8.0 95,000 297,007<br />
INDUSTRIALS<br />
Aerospace & Defense<br />
The Boeing Company 96,114.0 12 11 N 63 7 74 7 130,000 b,c 329,352 43% 50% 0% 7%<br />
General Dynamics Corporation 31,469.0 12 10 N 64 9 75 8 70,000 b,c,e 278,413 48% 26% 25% 1%<br />
Honeywell International 38,581.0 12 11 N 63 8 72 7 100,000 b,c,e 315,669 61% 16% 16% 7%<br />
L-3 Communications Holdings 10,466.0 10 9 N 70 8 - 10 110,000 b,c 255,136 50% 47% 0% 3%<br />
Lockheed Martin Corporation 46,132.0 11 10 N 66 9 75 10 290,000 c,d 285,956 53% 45% 0% 2%<br />
Northrop Grumman Corporation 23,526.0 13 12 N 66 6 72 9 262,500 c,d,f 289,069 48% 48% 0% 4%<br />
Raytheon Company 23,247.0 10 9 N 63 7 74 9 90,000 b,c 316,223 51% 47% 0% 2%<br />
Rockwell Collins 5,244.0 9 8 N 67 10 74 6 100,000 b,c 263,713 44% 54% 0% 2%<br />
Textron 13,423.0 11 10 N 69 12 75 6 235,000 c,d,f 248,900 58% 40% 0% 2%<br />
United Technologies Corporation 56,098.0 13 12 Y 68 10 72 10 280,000 c,d,f 296,764 23% 76% 0% 1%<br />
Agricultural and Farm Machinery<br />
Deere & Company 28,863.0 11 10 N 62 6 72 5 120,000 b,c 249,443 50% 49% 0% 1%<br />
Air Freight & Logistics<br />
C.H. Robinson Worldwide 13.476.1 9 8 N 62 10 - 5 80,000 b,c 219,375 43% 57% 0% 0%<br />
Expeditors International of<br />
Washington 6,616.6 11 9 Y 63 7 72 6 65,000 b 266,812 25% 75% 0% 0%<br />
FedEx Corporation 47,453.0 12 11 N 58 10 75 9 111,000 e 264,301 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
United Parcel Service 58,363.0 11 10 N 61 8 75 8 100,000 b 242,202 40% 60% 0% 0%<br />
Airlines<br />
Alaska Air Group 5,598.0 11 10 N 60 9 72 10 150,000 c,d 135,427 37% 55% 0% 8%<br />
American Airlines Group 40,990.0 13 12 N 62 3 75 6 100,000 b 287,542 42% 49% 0% 9%<br />
Delta Air Lines 40,704.0 14 11 Y 62 5 72 12 90,000 b 301,522 38% 57% 0% 5%<br />
Southwest Airlines Co. 19,820.0 11 9 N 67 8 75 6 70,000 b 244,329 47% 53% 0% 0%<br />
United Continental Holdings 37,864.0 14 11 Y 60 4 75 11 85,000 b 312,903 52% 41% 0% 7%<br />
Building Products<br />
Allegion Public Limited Company 2,068.1 6 5 N 62 3 70 5 140,000 b 273,704 68% 26% 0% 6%<br />
Masco Corporation 7,142.0 10 8 Y 60 7 72 7 240,000 d 255,631 52% 48% 0% 0%<br />
Construction & Engineering<br />
Fluor Corporation 18,114.0 11 10 N 65 9 75 6 115,000 b 261,167 47% 52% 0% 1%<br />
Jacobs Engineering Group 12,114.8 11 9 Y 66 9 - 9 88,000 b,e 203,649 43% 33% 24% 0%<br />
Quanta Services 7,572.4 10 9 Y 60 8 73 13 75,000 b 268,909 42% 58% 0% 0%<br />
board index 2016 51
Comparative <strong>Board</strong> Data<br />
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Construction Machinery & Heavy Trucks<br />
Caterpillar 47,011.0 12 11 N 61 8 72 7 275,000 c,d 276,723 50% 46% 0% 4%<br />
Cummins 19,110.0 10 9 N 63 9 72 5 250,000 d 270,131 41% 57% 0% 2%<br />
PACCAR 19,115.1 11 8 Y 62 6 72 4 100,000 b,c 255,270 49% 51% 0% 0%<br />
Diversified Support Services<br />
Cintas Corporation 4,476.9 9 6 Y 64 7 73 4 55,000 b,c,e 182,765 46% 27% 27% 0%<br />
Iron Mountain 3,008.0 12 11 Y 61 7 75 13 75,000 b,c 242,437 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
Electrical Components & Equipment<br />
Acuity Brands 2,706.7 10 9 N 67 9 72 5 205,000 c,d,f 183,333 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
AMETEK 3,974.3 8 7 N 65 12 75 7 90,000 b,c,e 213,384 45% 29% 26% 0%<br />
Eaton Corporation 20,855.0 13 11 N 64 10 72 5 265,000 c,d 334,511 48% 43% 0% 9%<br />
Emerson Electric Company 22,304.0 11 10 N 63 8 72 10 240,000 d 282,558 47% 50% 0% 3%<br />
Rockwell Automation 6,307.9 9 8 N 61 9 72 6 165,000 b,c,d 219,902 44% 52% 0% 4%<br />
Environmental & Facilities Services<br />
Republic Services 9,115.0 10 9 Y 62 8 73 6 80,000 b 409,571 26% 74% 0% 0%<br />
Stericycle 2,985.9 10 8 Y 67 10 - 8 125,000 e,g,h 130,904 0% 0% 100% 0%<br />
Waste Management 12,961.0 10 9 Y 65 9 75 7 110,000 b 282,500 46% 54% 0% 0%<br />
Human Resource & Employment Services<br />
Robert Half International 5,094.9 7 5 N 64 12 - 5 40,000 b 344,361 19% 81% 0% 0%<br />
Industrial Conglomerates<br />
3M Company 30,274.0 12 11 N 65 6 74 8 280,000 c,d 293,479 45% 54% 0% 1%<br />
Danaher Corporation 20,563.1 10 7 Y 66 17 72 8 110,000 b,c,e 265,567 30% 43% 27% 0%<br />
General Electric Company 117,386.0 16 15 N 60 8 75 13 250,000 c,d,f 306,201 21% 72% 0% 7%<br />
Roper Technologies 3,582.4 9 8 N 65 12 78 6 42,500 b 751,973 7% 93% 0% 0%<br />
Industrial Machinery<br />
Dover Corporation 6,956.3 11 10 Y 66 10 75 12 240,000 d 256,591 52% 48% 0% 0%<br />
Flowserve Corporation 4,561.0 10 9 Y 61 8 72 12 60,000 b,c 223,221 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
Illinois Tool Works 13,405.0 11 10 N 60 8 75 5 135,000 b,c 272,781 54% 46% 0% 0%<br />
Ingersoll-Rand 13,300.7 12 11 N 67 10 75 6 285,000 d 281,874 49% 51% 0% 0%<br />
Parker-Hannifin Corporation 12,711.7 14 11 Y 63 12 75 7 120,000 b 257,729 49% 49% 0% 2%<br />
Pentair Ltd. 6,449.0 11 10 N 61 9 75 5 123,000 b,e 290,134 53% 28% 19% 0%<br />
Snap-on 3,593.1 9 8 N 62 7 75 8 85,000 b,c 246,545 39% 53% 0% 8%<br />
Stanley Black & Decker 11,171.8 11 10 N 63 6 72 5 125,000 b,c 260,422 52% 48% 0% 0%<br />
Xylem 3,653.0 10 9 Y 63 5 72 7 100,000 b,c 240,906 47% 53% 0% 0%<br />
Office Services & Supplies<br />
Pitney Bowes 3,578.1 11 10 Y 65 11 72 8 75,000 b 216,408 52% 46% 0% 2%<br />
Railroads<br />
CSX Corporation 11,811.0 12 11 N 65 9 75 6 90,000 b,c 290,967 34% 52% 0% 14%<br />
Kansas City Southern 2,418.8 9 8 Y 64 9 75 5 50,000 b,c 215,000 48% 42% 0% 10%<br />
Union Pacific Corporation 21,813.0 11 10 N 68 9 75 6 250,000 c,d,f 282,930 93% 0% 0% 7%<br />
Research & Consulting Services<br />
The Dun & Bradstreet Corporation 1,637.1 10 9 Y 56 5 72 9 70,000 b,c,e 229,709 41% 52% 0% 7%<br />
Equifax 2,663.6 10 9 N 64 10 72 4 80,000 b,c 242,358 38% 62% 0% 0%<br />
Nielsen Holdings plc 6,172.0 11 9 Y 61 5 - 5 80,000 b,c 229,209 12% 88% 0% 0%<br />
Verisk Analytics 2,068.0 12 11 N 65 12 75 10 82,500 b,c,e,i 242,732 18% 41% 41% 0%<br />
52<br />
spencer stuart
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Security & Alarm Services<br />
Tyco International 9,902.0 11 9 Y 64 8 72 6 110,000 b 266,000 46% 53% 0% 1%<br />
Trading Companies & Distributors<br />
Fastenal Company 3,869.2 9 6 Y 54 6 74 4 55,000 - 113,167 100% 0% 0% 0%<br />
United Rentals 5,817.0 11 10 Y 63 10 - 6 80,000 b 266,249 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
W.W. Grainger 9,973.4 10 9 N 63 13 75 7 85,000 b,c 243,327 38% 61% 0% 1%<br />
Trucking<br />
J.B. Hunt Transport Services 6,187.6 10 6 Y 59 9 72 4 200,000 c 195,140 39% 60% 0% 1%<br />
Ryder System 6,571.9 11 10 N 62 9 72 6 65,000 b,c 240,311 46% 53% 0% 1%<br />
TOTAL INDUSTRIALS<br />
Average 10.8 9.4 63.2 8.4 73.5 7.3 131,811 267,205 43% 51% 3% 3%<br />
Median 11.0 9.5 63.0 8.5 74.0 7.0 100,000 262,440<br />
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY<br />
Application Software<br />
Adobe Systems 4,795.5 11 10 N 60 9 72 10 150,000 c,d 349,484 25% 75% 0% 0%<br />
Autodesk 2,504.1 10 9 N 63 9 72 5 250,000 d 347,753 25% 75% 0% 0%<br />
Citrix Systems 3,275.6 13 11 N 64 10 72 5 265,000 c,d 412,369 36% 64% 0% 0%<br />
Intuit 4,192.0 11 10 N 66 9 75 10 290,000 c,d 393,043 25% 75% 0% 0%<br />
salesforce.com 6,667.2 11 10 N 63 6 72 5 125,000 b,c 600,604 11% 89% 0% 0%<br />
Communications Equipment<br />
Cisco Systems 49,161.0 11 10 Y 66 10 75 12 240,000 d 326,987 37% 63% 0% 0%<br />
F5 Networks 1,919.8 10 9 Y 61 8 72 12 60,000 b,c 343,060 27% 73% 0% 0%<br />
Harris Corporation 5,083.0 12 11 Y 61 7 75 13 75,000 b,c 250,045 47% 52% 0% 1%<br />
Juniper Networks 4,857.8 10 8 Y 60 7 72 7 240,000 d 411,664 30% 70% 0% 0%<br />
Motorola Solutions 5,695.0 10 9 N 63 7 74 9 90,000 b,c 245,839 33% 67% 0% 0%<br />
Data Processing & Outsourced Services<br />
Alliance Data Systems Corporation 6,439.7 13 12 N 62 3 75 6 100,000 b 253,581 27% 72% 0% 1%<br />
Automatic Data Processing 10,938.5 10 7 Y 66 17 72 8 110,000 b,c,e 267,950 41% 55% 0% 4%<br />
Fidelity National Information Services 6,595.2 12 10 N 64 9 75 8 70,000 b,c,e 337,683 59% 21% 20% 0%<br />
Fiserv 5,254.0 12 11 N 63 8 72 7 100,000 b,c,e 268,588 36% 32% 32% 0%<br />
Global Payments 2,773.7 12 11 N 67 10 75 6 285,000 d 248,125 42% 58% 0% 0%<br />
MasterCard 9,667.0 14 11 Y 63 12 75 7 120,000 b 320,102 39% 60% 0% 1%<br />
Paychex 2,739.6 9 8 N 67 10 74 6 100,000 b,c 228,648 52% 24% 24% 0%<br />
PayPal Holdings 9,248.0 9 8 N 65 12 78 6 42,500 b n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a<br />
Total System Services 2,779.5 11 10 N 61 8 75 8 100,000 b 221,524 42% 29% 29% 0%<br />
Visa 13,880.0 13 12 Y 68 10 72 10 280,000 c,d,f 335,149 43% 54% 0% 3%<br />
The Western Union Company 5,483.7 14 11 Y 60 4 75 11 85,000 b 258,200 40% 41% 16% 3%<br />
Xerox Corporation 18,045.0 10 9 N 63 13 75 7 85,000 b,c 219,479 43% 57% 0% 0%<br />
Electronic Components<br />
Amphenol Corporation 5,568.7 9 8 N 62 10 - 5 80,000 b,c 208,611 40% 60% 0% 0%<br />
Corning 9,111.0 10 9 N 64 10 72 4 80,000 b,c 285,619 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
Electronic Equipment & Instruments<br />
FLIR Systems 1,557.1 11 10 N 60 8 75 5 135,000 b,c 245,870 40% 31% 29% 0%<br />
board index 2016 53
Comparative <strong>Board</strong> Data<br />
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Electronic Manufacturing Services<br />
TE Connectivity 12,233.0 10 9 Y 56 5 72 9 70,000 b,c,e 294,505 34% 59% 0% 7%<br />
Home Entertainment Software<br />
Activision Blizzard 4,664.0 10 9 N 67 9 72 5 205,000 c,d,f 363,620 31% 69% 0% 0%<br />
Electronic Arts 4,396.0 9 6 Y 54 6 74 4 55,000 - 337,991 10% 38% 52% 0%<br />
Internet Software & Services<br />
Akamai Technologies 2,197.4 6 5 N 62 3 70 5 140,000 b 318,018 21% 79% 0% 0%<br />
Alphabet 74,989.0 8 7 N 65 12 75 7 90,000 b,c,e 429,769 18% 82% 0% 0%<br />
eBay 8,592.0 11 9 Y 63 7 72 6 65,000 b 297,465 26% 74% 0% 0%<br />
Facebook 17,928.0 11 10 N 65 9 75 6 115,000 b 377,922 19% 81% 0% 0%<br />
VeriSign 1,059.4 11 10 Y 63 10 - 6 80,000 b 342,945 25% 75% 0% 0%<br />
IT Consulting & Other Services<br />
Accenture 32,914.0 12 11 N 65 6 74 8 280,000 c,d 292,217 37% 63% 0% 0%<br />
Cognizant Technology<br />
Solutions Corporation 12,416.0 11 10 N 63 8 72 10 240,000 d 311,566 33% 34% 33% 0%<br />
International Business<br />
Machines Corporation 81,741.0 10 9 N 70 8 - 10 110,000 b,c 373,303 82% 0% 0% 18%<br />
Teradata Corporation 2,530.0 11 9 Y 64 8 72 6 110,000 b 317,437 11% 89% 0% 0%<br />
Semiconductor Equipment<br />
Applied Materials 9,659.0 12 11 N 65 9 75 6 90,000 b,c 299,855 34% 66% 0% 0%<br />
KLA-Tencor Corporation 2,814.0 11 9 Y 61 5 - 5 80,000 b,c 286,711 42% 58% 0% 0%<br />
Lam Research Corporation 5,259.3 13 12 N 66 6 72 9 262,500 c,d,f 315,307 37% 60% 0% 3%<br />
Semiconductors<br />
Analog Devices 3,435.1 12 11 N 61 8 72 7 275,000 c,d 258,598 32% 34% 34% 0%<br />
Broadcom Limited 6,824.0 11 10 N 62 6 72 5 120,000 b,c 176,086 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
First Solar 3,579.0 16 15 N 60 8 75 13 250,000 c,d,f 245,091 46% 54% 0% 0%<br />
Intel Corporation 55,355.0 9 8 Y 64 9 75 5 50,000 b,c 313,089 29% 70% 0% 1%<br />
Linear Technology Corporation 1,475.1 11 8 Y 62 6 72 4 100,000 b,c 214,190 38% 62% 0% 0%<br />
Microchip Technology 2,173.3 11 10 N 61 9 75 5 123,000 b,e 155,295 49% 51% 0% 0%<br />
Micron Technology 16,192.0 11 10 Y 65 11 72 8 75,000 b 380,733 34% 66% 0% 0%<br />
Nvidia Corporation 5,010.0 7 5 N 64 12 - 5 40,000 b 285,904 26% 74% 0% 0%<br />
Qorvo 2,610.7 11 10 N 62 9 72 6 65,000 b,c 227,266 39% 14% 47% 0%<br />
QUALCOMM 25,281.0 9 8 N 62 7 75 8 85,000 b,c 378,343 40% 53% 0% 7%<br />
Skyworks Solutions 3,258.4 11 10 N 69 12 75 6 235,000 c,d,f 267,763 31% 68% 0% 1%<br />
Texas Instruments 13,000.0 11 10 N 68 9 75 6 250,000 c,d,f 297,094 32% 33% 34% 1%<br />
Xilinx 2,213.9 10 9 Y 65 9 75 7 110,000 b 265,699 32% 68% 0% 0%<br />
Systems Software<br />
CA 4,025.0 14 11 Y 62 5 72 12 90,000 b 356,250 23% 73% 0% 4%<br />
Microsoft Corporation 93,580.0 10 9 Y 60 8 73 13 75,000 b 228,583 41% 59% 0% 0%<br />
Oracle Corporation 37,047.0 9 8 N 61 9 72 6 165,000 b,c,d 780,004 18% 44% 38% 0%<br />
Red Hat 2,052.2 11 9 N 67 8 75 6 70,000 b 332,827 16% 84% 0% 0%<br />
Symantec Corporation 6,508.0 12 11 N 63 7 74 7 130,000 b,c 326,879 28% 72% 0% 0%<br />
Technology Hardware, Storage & Peripherals<br />
Apple 233,715.0 9 6 Y 64 7 73 4 55,000 b,c,e 398,762 36% 63% 0% 1%<br />
EMC Corporation 24,704.0 12 11 N 58 10 75 9 111,000 e 353,624 36% 64% 0% 0%<br />
54<br />
spencer stuart
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Technology Hardware, Storage & Peripherals (continued)<br />
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company 52,107.0 11 9 Y 66 9 - 9 88,000 b,e n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a<br />
HP 103,355.0 10 6 Y 59 9 72 4 200,000 c 311,030 23% 59% 16% 2%<br />
NetApp 5,546.0 10 9 Y 62 8 73 6 80,000 b 337,171 27% 61% 12% 0%<br />
Seagate Technology Public<br />
Limited Company 13,739.0 10 8 Y 67 10 - 8 125,000 e,g,h 334,149 31% 69% 0% 0%<br />
Western Digital Corporation 14,572.0 12 11 N 65 12 75 10 82,500 b,c,e,i 341,610 34% 66% 0% 0%<br />
TOTAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY<br />
Average 10.8 9.4 63.2 8.4 73.5 7.3 132,300 315,618 33% 59% 7% 1%<br />
Median 11.0 10.0 63.0 8.6 74.0 7.0 100,000 313,089<br />
MATERIALS<br />
Aluminum<br />
Alcoa 22,534.0 15 14 N 66 6 75 8 240,000 c 252,864 100% 0% 0% 0%<br />
Construction Materials<br />
Martin Marietta Materials 3,539.6 9 7 N 65 11 75 5 100,000 b,c 240,150 37% 42% 0% 21%<br />
Vulcan Materials 3,422.2 11 10 N 62 7 74 5 110,000 b 290,724 46% 53% 0% 1%<br />
Diversified Chemicals<br />
The Dow Chemical Company 48,778.0 13 12 N 63 8 72 16 115,000 b 261,721 48% 52% 0% 0%<br />
E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company 25,103.0 11 10 N 61 7 72 29 265,000 d 275,598 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
Eastman Chemical Company 9,648.0 12 11 N 65 9 75 5 100,000 b,c 250,929 46% 30% 0% 24%<br />
Diversified Metals and Mining<br />
Freeport McMoRan 15,877.0 8 7 Y 58 6 - 11 75,000 b,c 420,529 34% 64% 0% 2%<br />
Fertilizers & Agricultural Chemicals<br />
CF Industries Holdings 4,308.3 10 9 Y 62 7 74 10 100,000 b 244,502 46% 53% 0% 1%<br />
FMC Corporation 3,276.5 10 9 N 62 9 72 7 100,000 b,c 241,059 23% 72% 0% 5%<br />
Monsanto Company 15,001.0 13 12 N 60 8 75 6 245,000 c,d,f 277,284 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
The Mosaic Company 8,895.3 11 9 Y 60 7 74 8 90,000 b,h 275,272 37% 60% 0% 3%<br />
Gold<br />
Newmont Mining Corporation 7,729.0 10 9 Y 63 7 75 9 115,000 b 336,358 55% 45% 0% 0%<br />
Industrial Gases<br />
Air Products & Chemicals 9,894.9 8 7 N 61 5 72 9 100,000 b,c 247,291 51% 49% 0% 0%<br />
Praxair 10,776.0 11 10 N 66 9 72 6 100,000 b,c 266,050 41% 54% 0% 5%<br />
Metal & Glass Containers<br />
Ball Corporation 7,997.0 9 7 N 65 11 - 10 85,000 b 235,493 31% 49% 0% 20%<br />
Owens-Illinois 6,156.0 12 11 Y 62 8 - 12 67,500 b,c 204,154 55% 45% 0% 0%<br />
Paper Packaging<br />
Avery Dennison Corporation 5,966.9 9 8 Y 61 9 72 5 100,000 b,c 232,479 42% 54% 0% 4%<br />
International Paper Company 22,365.0 12 11 N 64 6 72 10 255,000 c,d 285,466 17% 81% 0% 2%<br />
Sealed Air Corporation 7,031.5 10 9 Y 66 10 75 7 205,000 c,d 211,524 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
WestRock Company 11,381.3 14 12 Y 60 10 72 5 115,000 b n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a<br />
Specialty Chemicals<br />
Ecolab 13,545.1 15 14 N 60 7 72 6 105,000 b,c,e 269,064 43% 37% 20% 0%<br />
International Flavors & Fragrances 3,023.2 11 10 N 64 6 72 5 225,000 d,f 234,596 51% 46% 0% 3%<br />
board index 2016 55
Comparative <strong>Board</strong> Data<br />
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Specialty Chemicals (continued)<br />
PPG Industries 15,330.0 10 8 Y 62 10 72 8 270,000 c,d 269,642 49% 47% 0% 4%<br />
Steel<br />
Nucor Corporation 16,439.3 8 7 N 62 7 72 4 95,000 b,c 247,533 43% 57% 0% 0%<br />
TOTAL MATERIALS<br />
Average 10.9 9.7 62.5 8.0 73.1 8.6 140,729 266,940 45% 50% 1% 4%<br />
Median 11.0 9.5 62.2 7.7 72.0 7.5 102,500 252,864<br />
TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES<br />
Alternative Carriers<br />
Level 3 Communications 8,229.0 11 10 Y 64 5 73 4 75,000 b 265,292 40% 60% 0% 0%<br />
Integrated Telecommunication Services<br />
AT&T 146,801.0 12 11 N 61 5 72 8 95,000 b,c 310,279 48% 48% 0% 4%<br />
CenturyLink 17,900.0 11 10 Y 62 11 75 10 65,000 b 297,031 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
Frontier Communications Corporation 5,576.0 11 10 Y 62 8 - 16 95,000 b,c 225,000 42% 58% 0% 0%<br />
Verizon Communications 131,620.0 13 12 N 61 6 72 10 100,000 b 287,026 42% 57% 0% 1%<br />
TOTAL TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES<br />
Average 11.6 10.6 61.7 7.0 73.0 9.6 86,000 276,786 44% 55% 0% 1%<br />
Median 11.0 10.0 61.6 6.2 72.5 10.0 95,000 287,026<br />
UTILITIES<br />
Utilities<br />
Ameren Corporation 6,098.0 11 10 N 63 6 72 7 85,000 b,c 210,133 52% 48% 0% 0%<br />
American Electric Power Company 16,453.2 12 11 N 63 6 72 7 105,500 b,c 273,780 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
American Water Works Company 3,159.0 9 8 Y 64 7 75 13 75,000 b 195,520 46% 53% 0% 1%<br />
CenterPoint Energy 7,386.0 9 7 Y 62 6 73 7 90,000 b 219,420 45% 55% 0% 0%<br />
CMS Energy Corporation 6,456.0 12 10 Y 61 5 75 8 95,000 b,c 233,222 49% 51% 0% 0%<br />
Consolidated Edison 12,554.0 10 8 N 66 10 75 10 100,000 b,c 257,437 50% 49% 0% 1%<br />
Dominion Resources 11,683.0 10 9 N 63 8 72 10 205,000 c,d 277,165 46% 46% 0% 8%<br />
DTE Energy Company 10,337.0 12 11 N 66 9 75 6 82,500 b,c 234,682 49% 51% 0% 0%<br />
Duke Energy Corporation 23,459.0 12 11 N 64 6 71 14 215,000 c,d 310,491 59% 41% 0% 0%<br />
Edison International 11,524.0 10 9 N 62 6 72 9 110,000 b 260,159 49% 48% 0% 3%<br />
Entergy Corporation 11,513.3 11 10 N 64 7 74 14 95,000 b 244,233 45% 45% 0% 10%<br />
Eversource Energy 7,954.8 12 11 N 68 8 75 7 100,000 b 208,655 51% 49% 0% 0%<br />
Exelon Corporation 29,447.0 13 12 Y 63 6 75 8 80,000 b 276,417 60% 36% 0% 4%<br />
FirstEnergy Corporation 15,026.0 14 13 Y 65 8 72 10 230,000 c,d 248,369 44% 53% 0% 3%<br />
NextEra Energy 17,486.0 12 11 N 63 8 72 6 220,000 d 251,833 46% 54% 0% 0%<br />
NiSource 4,651.8 9 8 Y 61 7 70 9 210,000 d 258,000 53% 47% 0% 0%<br />
NRG Energy 14,674.0 13 11 Y 65 9 75 9 225,000 b,d,f 260,697 44% 56% 0% 0%<br />
PG&E Corporation 16,833.0 12 11 N 65 8 72 12 120,000 b,c 257,460 53% 47% 0% 0%<br />
Pinnacle West Capital Corporation 3,495.4 10 9 N 68 12 - 7 95,000 b,c 203,057 51% 49% 0% 0%<br />
PPL Corporation 7,669.0 9 8 N 62 7 75 7 235,000 c,d,f 247,031 47% 52% 0% 1%<br />
56<br />
spencer stuart
number of<br />
directors<br />
independent<br />
directors <strong>Board</strong> fees ($)<br />
Percentage of<br />
total compensation<br />
AVERAGE<br />
COMPENSATION PER<br />
NON-EMPLOYEE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
MEETINGS PER YEARª<br />
COMPANY SALES<br />
($ IN MILLIONS)<br />
SEPARATE<br />
CHAIRMAN/CEO<br />
RETIREMENT AGE<br />
AVERAGE TENURE<br />
(years)<br />
BOARD RETAINER<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Retainer<br />
Footnotes<br />
INDEPENDENT<br />
DIRECTORS<br />
AVERAGE AGE<br />
all other<br />
OPTIONS<br />
TOTAL<br />
STOCK<br />
CASH<br />
Utilities (continued)<br />
Public Service Enterprise Group 10,415.0 11 10 N 67 11 72 9 85,000 b,c 239,798 50% 50% 0% 0%<br />
SCANA Corporation 4,380.0 11 10 N 60 10 70 9 193,000 c,d 199,378 42% 58% 0% 0%<br />
Sempra Energy 10,231.0 11 10 N 67 9 75 7 85,000 b,c 246,113 49% 45% 0% 6%<br />
Southern Company 17,489.0 15 14 N 65 6 72 9 110,000 b,c 242,657 47% 52% 0% 1%<br />
WEC Energy Group 5,926.1 13 11 Y 66 9 72 9 75,000 b 198,474 41% 50% 0% 9%<br />
Xcel Energy 11,024.5 11 10 N 62 10 72 6 90,000 b,c 240,229 20% 80% 0% 0%<br />
TOTAL UTILITIES<br />
Average 11.3 10.1 64.1 7.8 73.0 8.8 131,192 244,135 48% 50% 0% 2%<br />
Median 11.0 10.0 64.1 7.7 72.0 9.0 100,000 245,173<br />
TOTAL S&P500<br />
Average 10.8 9.2 63.1 8.5 73.3 8.4 118,521 285,065 38% 54% 6% 2%<br />
Median 11.0 9.0 63.0 8.2 72.0 7.5 100,000 269,642<br />
Footnotes:<br />
a Includes regular, special and telephonic board meetings.<br />
b Equity (stock or stock units) is paid in addition to stated retainer.<br />
c Directors can elect to receive cash compensation fully or partially in stock.<br />
d Equity (stock or stock units) is paid as part of retainer.<br />
e Stock option program for directors exists.<br />
f Equity portion of retainer paid in deferred stock.<br />
g Retainer paid 100% in stock.<br />
h Directors can elect to receive equity retainer fully or partially in cash.<br />
i Directors can elect to receive cash and/or stock compensation in stock options.<br />
j Dollar value equivalent for retainer not provided in proxy.<br />
k Directors can elect to receive stock in lieu of stock option grant.<br />
board index 2016 57
Research & Insights<br />
As the premier firm for board and CEO counsel and recruitment, <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> plays an active role in<br />
exploring the key concerns of boards and senior management and in the search for innovative solutions<br />
to the challenges they face. Through a range of articles and studies available at spencerstuart.com, we<br />
WDT Report 2016 G.qxp_Layout 1 3/7/16 10:29 AM Page 1<br />
examine business trends and developments in governance and their implications.<br />
Shareholder Engagement Survey Report B.qxp_Layout 1 7/26/16 1:14 PM Page 1<br />
Half<br />
Empty<br />
Half<br />
full<br />
The Effect of Shareholder<br />
Activism on Corporate Strategy<br />
THE EFFECT OF SHAREHOLDER<br />
ACTIVISM ON CORPORATE STRATEGY<br />
A 2016 NYSE GOVERNANCE SERVICES/EVERCORE/SPENCER STUART SURVEY REPORT<br />
How to Think About<br />
Assessing Leaders<br />
What Directors Think 2016<br />
WHAT DIRECTORS THINK<br />
SUCCESSFULLY NAVIGATING TODAY’S CHALLENGES<br />
WHILE MAXIMIZING SHAREHOLDER VALUE<br />
a CorporatE <strong>Board</strong> mEmBEr/SpEnCEr <strong>Stuart</strong> SurvEy<br />
2016 Global <strong>Board</strong> of<br />
Directors Survey<br />
Leadership Development<br />
Yesterday and Today:<br />
Approaches that Work<br />
Why Senior Leaders Need to<br />
Rethink Learning Intelligence<br />
Can They Make the Leap?<br />
What It Takes to Get to — and<br />
Succeed in — the Most Senior<br />
Functional Roles<br />
Getting from Here to There:<br />
Lessons Learned from a Decade<br />
of Digital Transformation<br />
Performance in the<br />
Spotlight: Assessment and<br />
<strong>Board</strong> Effectiveness<br />
The Four Biggest Hidden CEO<br />
Succession Risks and How to<br />
Avoid Them<br />
Technology in the <strong>Board</strong>room:<br />
Five Things Directors Should Be<br />
Thinking About<br />
Data Leadership:<br />
Defining the Expertise Your<br />
Organization Needs
Contact <strong>Board</strong> Us Governance Globally Trends: A Global View<br />
Amsterdam<br />
T 31 (0) 20.305.73.05<br />
Frankfurt<br />
T 49 (0) 69.61.09.27.0<br />
Minneapolis/St. Paul<br />
T 1.612.313.2000<br />
Sao Paulo<br />
T 55 11.2050.8000<br />
Atlanta<br />
T 1.404.504.4400<br />
Geneva<br />
T 41 22.312.36.38<br />
Montreal<br />
T 1.514.288.3377<br />
Seattle<br />
T 1.206.224.5660<br />
Bangalore<br />
T 91 80.6660.5712<br />
Hong Kong<br />
T 852.2521.8373<br />
Moscow<br />
T 7 495.797.36.37<br />
Shanghai<br />
T 86 21.2326.2828<br />
Barcelona<br />
T 34.93.487.23.36<br />
Houston<br />
T 1.713.225.1621<br />
Mumbai<br />
T 91 22 6616.1414<br />
Silicon Valley<br />
T 1.650.356.5500<br />
Beijing<br />
T 86.10.6535.2100<br />
Istanbul<br />
T 90 212.315.0400<br />
Munich<br />
T 49 (0) 89.45.55.53.0<br />
Singapore<br />
T 65 6586.1186<br />
Bogota<br />
T 57 1.654.3000<br />
Johannesburg<br />
T 27.11.557.5300<br />
New Delhi<br />
T 91 12.4485.4444<br />
Stamford<br />
T 1.203.324.6333<br />
Boston<br />
T 1.617.531.5731<br />
Lima<br />
T 51 1.445.5353<br />
New York<br />
T 1.212.336.0200<br />
Stockholm<br />
T 46 8.5348015 0<br />
Brussels<br />
T 32.2.732.26.25<br />
London<br />
T 44 20 7298.3333<br />
Orange County<br />
T 1.949.930.8000<br />
Sydney<br />
T 61.2.9240.0100<br />
Buenos Aires<br />
T 54 11.5680.1900<br />
Los Angeles<br />
T 1.310.209.0610<br />
Paris<br />
T 33 (0) 1.53.57.81.23<br />
Tokyo<br />
T 81 3.5223.9510<br />
Calgary<br />
T 1.403.538.8658<br />
Madrid<br />
T 34.91.745.85.00<br />
Philadelphia<br />
T 1.215.814.1600<br />
Toronto<br />
T 1.416.361.0311<br />
Chicago<br />
T 1.312.822.0080<br />
Melbourne<br />
T 61.3.8661.0100<br />
Prague<br />
T 420.221.411.341<br />
Vienna<br />
T 43.1.36.88.700.0<br />
Copenhagen<br />
T 45 3334.6700<br />
Dallas<br />
T 1.214.672.5200<br />
Dubai<br />
T 971.4.426.6500<br />
Mexico City<br />
T 52.55.5002.4950<br />
Rome<br />
T 39.06.802071<br />
<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong> <strong>Board</strong> Governance Trends is an exclusive<br />
Miami<br />
San Francisco<br />
source of insight T 1.305.443.9911 into the way board practices T 1.415.495.4141 are changing<br />
around the world and how they compare across countries.<br />
Milan<br />
Santiago<br />
It is a one-stop T 39.02.771251 online resource for the T latest 56.2.2.940.2700 data in board<br />
composition, governance practices and director compensation<br />
among leading public companies in more than 20 countries.<br />
Warsaw<br />
T 48.22.321.02.00<br />
Washington, D.C.<br />
T 1.202.639.8111<br />
Zurich<br />
T 41.44.257.17.17<br />
www.spencerstuart.com/research-and-insight/board-indexes<br />
Social Media @ <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong><br />
Stay up to date on the trends and topics that are<br />
Visit relevant spencerstuart.com to your business and career. for more information.<br />
@<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong>
Amsterdam<br />
Atlanta<br />
Bangalore<br />
Barcelona<br />
Beijing<br />
Bogota<br />
Boston<br />
Brussels<br />
Buenos Aires<br />
Calgary<br />
Chicago<br />
Copenhagen<br />
Dallas<br />
Dubai<br />
Frankfurt<br />
Geneva<br />
Hong Kong<br />
Houston<br />
Istanbul<br />
Johannesburg<br />
Lima<br />
London<br />
Los Angeles<br />
Madrid<br />
Melbourne<br />
Mexico City<br />
Miami<br />
Milan<br />
Minneapolis/St. Paul<br />
Montreal<br />
Moscow<br />
Mumbai<br />
Munich<br />
New Delhi<br />
New York<br />
Orange County<br />
Paris<br />
Philadelphia<br />
Prague<br />
Rome<br />
San Francisco<br />
Santiago<br />
Sao Paulo<br />
Seattle<br />
Shanghai<br />
Silicon Valley<br />
Singapore<br />
Stamford<br />
Stockholm<br />
Sydney<br />
Tokyo<br />
Toronto<br />
Vienna<br />
Warsaw<br />
Washington, D.C.<br />
Zurich<br />
Contact Us Globally<br />
Amsterdam<br />
T 31 (0) 20.305.73.05<br />
Atlanta<br />
T 1.404.504.4400<br />
Bangalore<br />
T 91 80.6660.5712<br />
Barcelona<br />
T 34.93.487.23.36<br />
Beijing<br />
T 86.10.6535.2100<br />
Bogota<br />
T 57 1.654.3000<br />
Boston<br />
T 1.617.531.5731<br />
Brussels<br />
T 32.2.732.26.25<br />
Buenos Aires<br />
T 54 11.5680.1900<br />
Calgary<br />
T 1.403.538.8658<br />
Chicago<br />
T 1.312.822.0080<br />
Copenhagen<br />
T 45 3334.6700<br />
Dallas<br />
T 1.214.672.5200<br />
Dubai<br />
T 971.4.426.6500<br />
Frankfurt<br />
T 49 (0) 69.61.09.27.0<br />
Geneva<br />
T 41 22.312.36.38<br />
Hong Kong<br />
T 852.2521.8373<br />
Houston<br />
T 1.713.225.1621<br />
Istanbul<br />
T 90 212.315.0400<br />
Johannesburg<br />
T 27.11.557.5300<br />
Lima<br />
T 51 1.445.5353<br />
London<br />
T 44 20 7298.3333<br />
Los Angeles<br />
T 1.310.209.0610<br />
Madrid<br />
T 34.91.745.85.00<br />
Melbourne<br />
T 61.3.8661.0100<br />
Mexico City<br />
T 52.55.5002.4950<br />
Miami<br />
T 1.305.443.9911<br />
Milan<br />
T 39.02.771251<br />
Social Media @ <strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong><br />
Stay up to date on the trends and topics that are<br />
relevant to your business and career.<br />
@<strong>Spencer</strong> <strong>Stuart</strong><br />
Minneapolis/St. Paul<br />
T 1.612.313.2000<br />
Montreal<br />
T 1.514.288.3377<br />
Moscow<br />
T 7 495.797.36.37<br />
Mumbai<br />
T 91 22 6616.1414<br />
Munich<br />
T 49 (0) 89.45.55.53.0<br />
New Delhi<br />
T 91 12.4485.4444<br />
New York<br />
T 1.212.336.0200<br />
Orange County<br />
T 1.949.930.8000<br />
Paris<br />
T 33 (0) 1.53.57.81.23<br />
Philadelphia<br />
T 1.215.814.1600<br />
Prague<br />
T 420.221.411.341<br />
Rome<br />
T 39.06.802071<br />
San Francisco<br />
T 1.415.495.4141<br />
Santiago<br />
T 56.2.2.940.2700<br />
Sao Paulo<br />
T 55 11.2050.8000<br />
Seattle<br />
T 1.206.224.5660<br />
Shanghai<br />
T 86 21.2326.2828<br />
Silicon Valley<br />
T 1.650.356.5500<br />
Singapore<br />
T 65 6586.1186<br />
Stamford<br />
T 1.203.324.6333<br />
Stockholm<br />
T 46 8.5348015 0<br />
Sydney<br />
T 61.2.9240.0100<br />
Tokyo<br />
T 81 3.5223.9510<br />
Toronto<br />
T 1.416.361.0311<br />
Vienna<br />
T 43.1.36.88.700.0<br />
Warsaw<br />
T 48.22.321.02.00<br />
Washington, D.C.<br />
T 1.202.639.8111<br />
Zurich<br />
T 41.44.257.17.17